855 


IJOSEPH  THE  SEER 


-HIS- 


PROPHETIC  MISSION. VINDICATED, 


AND    THE 


DIVINE    ORIGIN 


OF    THE 


BOOK  OF  MORION  DEFENDED  AND  MAINTAINED, 


BY  W.  W.  BLAIR. 


LAMONI,    IOWA: 

PRINTED    BY    THE    BOARD    OF    PUBLICATION    OF    THE          C 
i 
>  REORGANIZED    CHURCH    OF    CHRIST. 


JOSEPH  THE   SEER; 


HIS 


PROPHETIC  MISSION  VINDICATED, 

AND  THE 

DIVINE  ORIGIN 

OF 

IDE  BOOK  OF  MORION  DEFENDED  AND  MAINTAINED; 

BEING  A  REPLY 
BY  ELDER  WILLIAM  W.  BLAIR, 

Of  the  Reorganized  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Litter  Day  Saints, 

TO    ELDER    WILLIAM    SHELDON, 

Of  the  Second  Adventist  Society. 


PLANO,  ILLINOIS: 

PRINTED  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  THE  BOARD  OF  PUBLICATION  OF  THE  REORGANIZED 

CHURCH  OF  JESUS  CHRIST  OF  LATTER  DAY  SAINTS. 

1877. 


n  croft  Library 


PREFACE 


THE  severe  trials  to  which  the  Truth  of  God  lias  been  subjected  in  all 
the  past,  have  always  resulted  well  in  bringing  its  high  importance,  its 
essential  impregnability,  and  its  perpetual  beauties  into  clearer,  grander 
light,  disclosing  more  plainly  its  deep,  and  broad,  and  immovable  foun- 
dations. They  have  also  resulted  well  in  revealing  the  dark  and  delu 
sive  ways  of  error,  ways  so  common  to  the  conceited,  the  self-sufficient,, 
and  the  bigot,  who,  with  blind  heart,  and  clamorous  tongue,  or  pen,, 
would  compel  all  others  into  their  mazy  lines  of  thought,  and  into  their 
devious  and  inconsistent  modes  of  religious,  moral,  social,  and  scientific- 
conduct.  Truth  gains  and  error  loses  in  every  fairly  conducted  conflict- 
Such,  we  trust,  will  be  the  ultimate  fruits  of  the  recent  malevolent 
attack  of  Rev.  William  Sheldon  upon  the  faith  and  doctrines  of  the  Lat- 
ter Day  Saints,  to  which  we  reply  in  the  following  pages.  Truth  will 
arise  and  prevail. 

Mr.  Sheldon,  in  his  arguments,  draws  heavily  on  various  anti-Mor- 
mon writers,  from  Howe  to  Ann  Eliza.  From  these  he  takes  his  cue ; 
and  from  their  productions  he  obtains  his  chief  enlightenment,  and  his 
loftiest  inspirations ;  yet,  notably,  he  fails  to  give  them  their  proper  cred- 
its. This  literary  piracy  will  be  found  to  be  quite  in  keeping  with  the 
general  tenor  of  his  work,  as  we  proceed. 

It  will  also  be  seen  that  he  is  a  prince  among  cavilers,  and  that  he 
is  as  feeble  in  his  sophisms  as  he  is  fertile  in  invention.  He  builds, 
with  affected  seriousness,  his  men-of-straw ;  and  then,  with  self-compla- 
cent, pompous  puffs,  topples  them  over,  and  then  applauds  himself  for 
decisive  victories. 

He  attempts,  with  persistent  zeal,  to  make  the  Book  of  Mormon  and 
the  Inspired  Translation  claim  for  themselves  what  they  do  not  claim, 
viz.,  that  all  their  historical  and  epistolary  parts  were  written  with  un- 


IV.  PREFACE. 

•erring  precision,  and  infallible  accuracy,  and  under  the  fullest  and 
highest  measure  of  inspiration ;  but  in  this  attempt  he  fails,  miserably. 

He  seeks  to  force  upon  the  standard  writings  of  the  Church  such 
'-sense  and  meanisg  as  are  utterly  foreign  and  contrary  to  them ;  and  this 
lie  does,  evidently,  with  the  base  purpose  of  making  them  appear  false 
land  contradictory. 

We  regret  that  Mr.  Sheldon  has  quoted  our  works  so  inaccurately, 
'and  that  he  lias  cited  passages  so  incorrectly ;  for  it  tends  to  perplex 
tlie  reader,  both  as  respects  his  statements,  and,  possibly,  in  respect  to 
our  answers;  beside  which  it  places  him  in  the  attitude  of  either  a 
heedless,  or  a  lawless  controversialist. 

'It  is  quite  impossible  in  these  pages  to  notice  more  than  the  major 
''and  more  important  part  of  the  objections  urged  by  Mr.  Sheldon;  and 
tills  we  cannot  do  in  a  manner  nearly  so  extended  as  we  could  wish, 
and  as  we  know  their  importance  demands ;  but  we  have  undertaken  to 
ceply  to  all  those  of  any  real  force  or  value. 

If  in  anything  in  this  work  we  have  descended  to  too  low  a  plane 
ila.  our  argument,  our  main  apology  is,  that  we  thought  it  best,  in  the 
i  Interests  of  truth,  to  follow  our  opponent  wherever  he  went,  in  order  to 
tilash  the  true  light  upon  his  dark  and  crooked  ways,  and  thus  disclose 
^iiis  errors. 

We  have  frequently  emphasized  passages  quoted,  and  we  have  done 
so  in  order  to  call  special  attention  to  the  matter  under  consideration ; 
lint  we  disclaim  any  intention  of  thereby  changing  the  sense  of  such 
passages. 

We  submit  our  work  to  the  careful  and  considerate  attention  of  the 
reader,  asking  that  it  be  judged  upon  the  merits  of  its  facts,  and  not 
^upon  the  excellency  of  its  diction,  or  the  beauty  and  finish  of  its  periods. 

We  regret  its  brevity,  and  its  imperfections ;  especially  when  we 
•consider  the  weighty  matters  of  which  it  treats. 

We  have  written  it  in  the  interests  of  truth— diamond  truth— and 
•far  the  promotion  of  the  righteousness  of  God  among  men,  and  to  fur- 
tfcer  the  cause  of  "full  salvation."  And  with  this  consciousness  we  send 
it  out,  humbly  asking  for  it  -the  best  blessings  of  heaven,  a  respectful 
reception  among  men,  and  a  fair  hearing  by  all  into  whose  hands  it 
may  come. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


PROPHETIC  MISSION  OF  JOSEPH  SMITH  VINDICATED, 

AND  THE 

DIVINE  ORIGIN  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  MORMON  MAINTAINED, 
AND  DEFENDED. 


CHAPTER  I. 

We  have  recently  read  in  the  World9 s  Crisis  for  July,  1875,  & 
lengthy  article,  entitled  "Mormonism  Examined;  or,  Was  Joseph 
Smith  a  Divinely  Inspired  Prophet  ?"  from  the  pen  of  Elder  Wm~ 
Sheldon,  a  minister  of  the  Advent  Church,  and  sometime  editor 
of  the  Christian  Advent  Times,  and  more  recently  his  book  entitled 
"Mormonism  Reviewed,"  and  feeling  that  they  should  be  answered^ 
we  now  undertake  this  review. 

Mr.  Sheldon  doubtless  availed  himself  of  all  the  arguments  hith- 
erto used  by  opponents  of  the  Latter  Day  Work,  selecting  such  as 
he  thought  he  could  use  with  effect,  and  has  then  added  to  them  an 
occasional  one  that  has  at  least  the  merit  of  being  new.  His  affected 
fairness  is  painfully  apparent,  while  his  false  inferences,  his  bald 
mis-statements,  and  his  frequent  false  and  garbled  quotations,  place- 
him  in  an  unpleasantly  low  rank  among  controversialists.  This  we 
very  much  regret,  as  from  a  brief  acquaintance  with  the  gentleman 
we  had  expected  of  him  better  things.  His  course  adds  but  another, 
to  the  long  list  of  evidences,  stretching  down  through  the  ages,  that 
men,  when  they  have  an  end  in  view,  usually,  spare  no  effort,  and 
use  without  scruple  any  means  to  attain  it — "the  end  [with  them}; 
justifies  the  means." 

We  are  not  averse  to  criticism,  but,  on  the  contrary,  admire  it 
when  it  is  conducted  with  fairness  and  skill;  but  when  it  degener- 
ates into  quibbling,  low  trickery,  and  contemptible  pettifoggery 
then  the  less  of  it  the  better. 


•6  The  Divine  Calling  of 


O 


We  have  no  quarrel  with  any  for  not  believing  as  we  do;  all  may 
believe  as  they  think  best,  and  we  are  morally  bound  to  respect  them 
in  that  right;  for  the  right  of  private  judgment,  and  the  fact  of 
personal  responsibility,  are  inherent  in  man,  and  ordained  of  God. 
What  we  ask,  and  all  that  we  ask,  is,  for  others  to  bear  in  mind  that 
the  Latter  Day  Saints,  as  well  as  themselves,  should  be  respected  in 
their  rights,  and  be  treated  in  respect  to  their  faith  and  icorks, 
honestly,  fairly  and  courteously. 

As  for  Mr.  Sheldon, — the  propriety  of  his  efforts,  the  strength  of 
his  arguments,  the  piety  of  his  motives,  and  the  extent  of  his  success 
in  proving  that  "Mornionism"  is  false  in  its  foundations  and  in  its 
leading  facts, — the  reader  must  form  his  own  judgment  as  we 
progress. 

Mr.  Sheldon  postulates  the  following:  "The  claims  of  Mormonism 
to  divine  origin,  stand  or  fall  with  a  correct  answer  to  the  simple 
question,  Was  Joseph  Smith  a  true  prophet;"  and  he  then  attempts 
to  prove  that  there  are  historical  errors  in  the  Book  of  Mormon, 
assuming  that  if  there  are,  then  Joseph  Smith,  who  translated  the 
book,  must  be  a  false  prophet.  This  claim  is  certainly  a  novel  one. 

To  make  a  translator  responsible  for  the  truth  or  falsity  of  the 
facts  he  translates,  is  probably  an  original  idea  with  Mr.  S.,  and 
one  that  he  feels  is  quite  indispensable  to  his  success.  Sensible,  fair- 
dealing  people,  hardly  think  of  holding  Pope  responsible  for  the 
truth  or  falsity  of  Homer's  Illiad,  or  Odyssey,  because  he  translated 
them;  nor  would  they  hold  the  translators  of  the  Bible  responsible 
for  the  character  of  its  contents,  but  only  for  the  faithfulness  with 
which  they  performed  their  work  of  translation. 

Now,  the  Book  of  Mormon  in  more  places  than  one  admits  that 
there  may  be  errors  and  imperfections  in  it.  It  does  not  claim  abso- 
lute perfection  as  to  its  contents  in  all,  and  in  every  respect.  Its 
historical  parts  do  not  claim  to  be  written  by  revelation,  or  by  such 
measure  of  inspiration  as  to  exclude  errors  and  defects  in  language, 
and  style ;  nor  does  it  claim  to  be  absolutely  correct  in  all  its  his- 
torical dates.  Nephi,  the  very  first  writer  in  the  book  is  conscious 
that  through  his  inherent  "weakness"  his  record  might  be,  possibly, 
faulty.  He  says. 

"If  I  do  err,  even  did  they  err  of  old;  not  that  I  would  excuse  myself  because 
of  other  men,  but  because  of  the  weakness  which  is  in  me,  according  to  the 
flesh." — 1  Xephi  5:  -IT. 

That  some  of  the  sacred  historians  "of  old"  did  "err"  in   some  of 


Joseph  Smith  Defended. 


their  writings  is  too  well  known  to  need  any  argument  to  prove  it, 
as  may  be  seen  by  comparing  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Nor  is  the  New  Testament  free  from  this  defect.  One 
instance  may  suffice  for  this  place.  In  Acts,  1  : 18,  19,  we  are  told 
that  Judas  obtained  for  betraying  Christ,  money  with  which  he 
bought  a  field;  but  in  Matthew  27  :  5,  6,  7,  we  are  told  that  the 
chief  priests  with  that  money  bought  the  field.  So  of  Paul,  1  Cor. 
10  : 8,  compare  Num.  25  :  9.  Here  are  conflicts,  which  with  others 
that  occur,  prove  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  history 
made  some  mistakes — they  did  "err"  in,  at  least,  a  few  things. 
Mr.  S.  quotes  the  Book  of  Nephi : 

"And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  thirty-fourth  year,  in  the  first  month,  in  the  fourth 
day  of  the  month,  *  *  *  then  behold  there  was  darkness  upon  the  face  of  the 
land.  *  *  *  And  it  came  to  pass  that  it  did  last  for  the  space  of  three  days.11 
—Nephi  4:  2. 

This,  Mr.  S.  claims,  was  the  time  of  Christ's  crucifixion,  as  pre- 
dicted by  the  Lamanite  prophet  Samuel;  and,  that  its  occurring  on 
the  "fourth  day"  of  the  "first  month,"  instead  of  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  first  month,  Jewish  time,  proves  the  account  false,  the  Book 
of  Mormon  untrue,  and  Joseph  Smith,  its  translator,  a  false  prophet. 
Now,  if  Mr.  S.  had  read  and  honestly  considered  the  preceding 
paragraph,  he  might  have  spared  us  the  necessity  of  exposing  what 
savors  strongly  of  craftiness,  and  even  downright  trickery.  It  reads : 

"It  was  a  just  man  who  did  keep  the  record ;  *  *  *  and  now  it  came  to  pass, 
if  there  was  no  mistake  made  in  the  reckoning  of  our  time." 

Here  is  a  frank  admission  of  a  possible  error  in  the  record,  as  to 
time.  Why  did  not  Mr.  S.  cite  this  qualifying  statement?  Evi- 
dently because  he  knew  that  his  argument  would  thereby  be  stripped 
of  its  force. 

The  Nephites  reckoned  time  under  three  different  eras;  the  first 
dating  from  Lehi's  exodus  from  Jerusalem, — 1  Nephi,  1:2.  Jacob 
1:1,  etc.;  the  next  dating  with  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  the 
Judges, — Alma,  1:1;  2:1;  also,  book  of  Nephi,  1:1;  and  the 
next  with  the  birth  of  Christ,— Book  of  Nephi  1  :  6-8.  Whether 
their  months  were  after  the  Jewish  style,  or  not,  is  uncertain. 
Their  months  may  have  begun  with  the  going  out  of  Lehi  and  his 
family  from  Jerusalem.  As  to  whether  "the  first  month,"  of  Nephi 
4  :  2,  was  really  intended  for  Jewish  time,  or  for  time  peculiar  to 
the  Nephites,  it  is  not  our  province  now  to  determine.  Whatever 
the  time  was,  Jewish  or  Nephite,  the  writer  of  the  book  does  not 


8  The  Divine  Calling  of 

claim  that  it  was  absolutely  correct.  Joseph  Smith  translated  it  as 
he  found  it;  and  the  correctness  or  incorrectness  of  those  dates  can- 
not affect  the  truthfulness  of  Joseph  Smith's  calling. 

TIME  OF  CHRIST'S  BIRTH. 

Mr.  S.  next  affirms  that  '-the  Book  of  Mormon  locates  the  birth 
of  Christ  too  late  in  the  world's  history  to  harmonize  with  the  Bible/' 
because  it  is  stated  in  2  Nephi  11:4,  that  the  Messiah  should  come 
in  six  hundred  years  from  the  time  that  Lehi  left  Jerusalem,  which 
was  in  the  first  year  of  King  Zedekiah's  reign.  Mr.  S.  enters  into 
a  lengthy  argument  to  prove  that  the  birth  of  Christ  occurred  "just 
five  hundred  and  fifty-three  years  from  the  first  of  Zedekiah." 

As  to  the  precise  number  of  years  between  those  events,  chrpnol- 
ogists  differ.  All  that  seems  necessary  now  is  to  find  what  was 
intended  by  the  statement  in  question ;  for  it  is  a  wise  maxim  that 
"the  thing  intended,  is  the  thing  said."  The  text  reads: — 

"For  according  to  the  words  of  the  prophets,  the  Messiah  cometh  in  six  hun- 
dred years  from  the  time  that  my  father  left  Jerusalem.'' 

Here  is  a  text  similar  in  structure,  in  which  the  Lord  said  to 
Abraham : — 

"Thy  seed  shall  be  a  stranger  in  a  land  that  is  not  theirs,  and  shall  serve 
them;  and  they  shall  afflict  them  four  hundred  years.'1 — Gen.  15  : 13. 

Now,  In  Ex.  12  : 40,  it  is  said,  "The  sojourning  of  Israel,  who 
dwelt  in  Egypt,  was  four  hundred  and  thirty  years."  Here  is  a 
difference  of  thirty  years,  when  we  descend  to  verbal  niceties,  be- 
tween the  time  as  promised,  and  the  recorded  time  of  history.  Will 
Mr.  S.  impeach  the  Almighty,  or  invalidate  Bible  history,  because 
of  this  discrepancy !  The  grounds  here  presented  are  much  better 
for  his  doing  so,  than  are  his  supposed  grounds  for  invalidating  the 
testimony  of  Nephi.  For  in  one  case  there  is  an  admitted  verbal 
difference,  of  thirty  years,  while  in  the  other  there  is  not.  What 
was  evidently  intended  in  the  promise  to  Abraham,  was,  that  about 
four  hundred  years,  in  round  numbers,  would  measure  Israel's  cap- 
tivity in  Egypt.  So  in  regard  to  the  "six  hundred  years"  predict- 
ed by  Nephi,  a  fair  interpretation  would  be  that  "in  about  six  hun- 
dred years." 

But  we  need  not  dwell  upon  this,  for  it  is  a  well  known 
fact  that  there  is  quite  a  difference  of  opinion  about  the  date 
of  our  Savior's  birth,  and  Mr.  S/s  statement  is  only  his  personal 


Joseph  Smith  Defended. 


opinion  about  that  matter.  Tegg,  editor  of  "The  Chronology,  or 
Historian's  Companion/'  makes  it  about  six  hundred  and  four  year& 
from  the  first  of  Zedekiah.  Rollin  makes  it  about  six  hundred; 
Usher,  Petavius,  Jackson,  Hales,  and  Bunsen,  near  the  same;  and, 
as  we  have  seen,  Mr.  S.  fixes  it  at  just  precisely  "five  hundred  and 
fifty-three/'  a  difference  of  forty-seven  years.  It  may  be  well  to  re- 
mark that  Mr.  S.  reaches  his  very  precise  figures,  by  means  of  his 
forced  interpretation  of  Daniel  9  :  25.  Mr.  S.  and  his  fellows,  have 
devoted  not  a  little  labor  to  "the  time  question,"  for  the  last  twenty- 
five  or  more  years;  and,  if  they  succeed  as  well  in  the  future  as  they 
have  in  the  past,  they  will  convince  others,  even  if  they  fail  to  con- 
vince themselves,  that  they  know  but  little  in  reckoning  time. 
Their  erroneous  methods  of  interpretation,  which  have  involved 
them  in  serious  blunders  and  painful  mistakes,  proclaim  them  "blind 
guides;"  especially  upon  questions  of  time.  "By  their  fruits  ye- 
shall  know  them/' 

That  Mr.  S,  has  gone  wide  of  the  mark,  as  is  usual,  in  stating  that 
it  was  but  five  hundred  and  fifty-three  years  from  the  first  of  Zede- 
kiah to  the  birth  of  Jesus,  we  will  now  proceed  to  show,  and  that,. 
too,  in  part,  from  this  same  prophecy  of  Daniel  : 

"Seventy  weeks  are  determined  upon  thy  people  and  upon  thy  holy  city,  to- 
finish  the  transgression,  and  to  make  an  end  of  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation 
for  iniquity,  and  to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness,  and  to  seal  up  the  vision 
and  prophecy,  and  to  anoint  the  Most  Holy.  Know  therefore  and  understand, 
that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  commandment  to  restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem,  unto 
the  Messiah  the  Prince,  shall  be  seven  weeks,  and  three  score  and  two  iveeks;  the 
street  shall  be  built  again,  and  the  wall,  even  in  troublous  times.  And  after  three 
score  and  two  weeks  shall  Messiah  be  cut  off,  but  not  for  himself:  and  the  people 
of  the  prince  that  shall  come  shall  destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary  ;  and  the 
end  thereof  shall  be  with  a  flood,  and  unto  the  end  of  the  war  desolations  are 
determined.  And  he  shall  confirm  the  covenant  with  many  for  one  week',  and 
in  the  midst  of  the  week  he  shall  cause  the  sacrifice  and  the  oblation  to  cease> 
and  for  the  overspreading  of  abominations  he  shall  make  it  desolate,  even  until 
the  consummation,  and  that  determined  shall  be  poured  upon  the  desolate.  "-~ 
Dan.  9:24-27. 

That  the  days  composing  these  periods  signify  so  many  years  af 
common  time  we  fully  believe. 

Now,  it  should  be  carefully  noted  that  the  "seventy  weeks,"  (or 
four  hundred  and  ninety  years),  are  divided  into  periods  of  "seven 
weeks,  and  threescore  and  two  weeks,"  (or  four  hundred  and 
eighty-three  years),  leaving  "the  week,"  or,  "one  week,"  (seven 
years),  as  the  last  and  concluding  period.  Now,  "from  the  going 


10  The  Divine  Calling  of 

forth  of  the  commandment  to  restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem  unto 
the  Messiah,  the  Prince,  shall  be  seven  weeks,  and  threescore  and 
two  weeks," — or  four  hundred  and  eighty-three  years.  This  cer- 
tainly does  not  relate  to  the  commandment  of  Cyrus  to  build  the 
temple  as  Mr.  S.  claims,  for  that  was  issued,  according  to  Rollin, 
(Hist.  Cyrus,  ch.  l,art.  3,  sec.  2.),  A.D.  536,  or  about  from  five  hun- 
dred and  sixty-two  to  five  hundred  and  sixty-seven  years  before 
•'Messiah  the  Prince"  was  manifested,  which  evidently  occurred 
at  his  baptism  by  John,  (see  John,  1  :  29-41),  and  with  this  agrees 
the  dates  in  the  Bible,  Ezra  1:1.  The  "commandment"  predicted 
was  clearly  that  one  which  should  effect  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  Jews,  and  eventuate  in  the  building  up  of  their  city — "the 
street,"  "and  the  wall" — and  all  this  "even  in  troublous  times,"  for 
such  are  the  terms  of  the  prophecy.  Twenty  years  after  the  decree 
of  Cyrus,  in  the  sixth  year  of  Darius,  "the  temple  was  finished  and 
dedicated,"  but  "the  walls  remained  as  the  Assyrians  had  left  them" 
at  the  close  of  the  terrible  seige  seventy  years  before — (a).  Fifty- 
eight  years  after  the  temple  was  dedicated,  or  "B.C.  457,  Ezra 
arrived  from  Babylon  with  a  caravan  of  Priests,  Levites,  Nethinims, 
and  lay  people." — Ibid.  This  was  by  the  commandment  of  Ar- 
taxerxes  [Longimanus], — Ezra  7  : 1-28.  And  the  effect  of  this 
"commandment"  was  to  restore  Jerusalem  to  its  former  state,  before 
the  captivity,  in  respect  to  its  civil  government,  and  religious 
services : 

"And  thou,  Ezra,  after  the  wisdom  of  thy  God,  that  is  in  thine  hand,  set  mag- 
istrates and  judges,  which  may  judge  all  the  people  that  are  beyond  the  river, 
all  such  as  know  the  laws  of  thy  God  ;  and  teach  ye  them  that  know  them  not. 
And  whosoever  will  not  do  the  law  of  thy  God,  and  the  law  of  the  king,  let 
judgment  be  executed  speedily  upon  him,  whether  it  be  unto  death,  or  to  ban- 
ishment, or  to  confiscation  of  goods,  or  to  imprisonment."— Ezra  7:  25,  26. 

It  is  true  that  the  building  of  "the  street,"  and  "the  wall"  did 
not  take  place  till  about  thirteen  years  after  this,  in  the  twentieth  of 
Artaxerxes,  or  about  B.C.  444-5,  but  the  "commandment  to  restore 
and  to  build  Jerusalem"  was  given  to  Ezra.  This  work  of  build- 
ing "the  wall"  was  done  when  Nehemiah  was  Governor  of  Judea. 
Neh.  2.  And  this  building  was  done  "even  in  troublous  times,"  for 

*  "They  which  builded  on  the  wall,  and  they  which  bare  burdens,  with  those 
that  laded,  every  one  with  one  of  his  hands  wrought  in  the  work,  and  with 
the  other  hand  held  a  weapon.  For  the  builders,  every  one  had  his  sword 
girded  by  his  side,  and  so  builded."— -Neh.  4: 17,  18. 

(a)  Bible  Diet.,  Smith,  Art.  Jerusalem. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  11 

Now,  "from  the  commandment"  of  Artaxerxes  to  Ezra,  to  "res- 
tore" Jerusalem  to  its  former  religious  and  civil  estate,  (which  we 
see  went  forth  about  B.C.  457),  to  the  announcement  of  "Messiah 
the  Prince,"  (John  1  : 29-41)  A.D.  30,  would  be  four  hundred  and 
eighty-seven  years.  From  this  take  off  four  years  for  the  fact  that 
our  A.  D.  begins,  it  is  said,  four  years  after  Christ  was  born,  and 
this  would  leave  just  four  hundred  and  eighty-three  years,  or,  "seven 
weeks,  three  score  and  two  weeks/' 

That  "the  week" — the  last  period— "in  the  midst"  of  which  "he 
shall  cause  the  sacrifice  and  the  oblation  [under  the  law]  to  cease" 
measures  the  three  and  a  half  years  of  Christ's  active  ministry,  the 
terminating  of  the  law  of  sacrifices  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself  on 
the  cross,  (Heb.  10  : 4-12,  &c.),  with  the  three  and  a  half  years  of 
his  ministers  fruitful  labors  in  establishing  the  New  Covenant  among 
the  Jews,  is  very  probable,  if  not  conclusive. 

And  further;  that  the  "seven  weeks" — or  forty-nine  years — refer 
to  the  peculiar  period  immediately  following  the  "going  forth  of  the 
commandment  to  restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem,"  is,  I  think,  quite 
evident;  and  that  the  period  of  "threescore  and  two  weeks" —  or 
four  hundred  and  thirty-four  years — are  to  be  added  to  the  forty- 
nine  years,  making  four  hundred  and  eighty-three  years,  thus  bring- 
ing us  to  the  times  when  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  was  announced, 
I  also  think  is  beyond  question;  but  of  this  we  have  not  time  to 
write  at  length. 

Eollin,  whose  chronological  dates  differ  from  those  of  Usher,  Hales, 
Haydn,  and  others,  thinks  the  beginning  of  the  "seventy  weeks" 
should  date  from  the  twentieth  of  Artaxerxes,  instead  of  the  seventh, 
for  the  reason  that  at  that  time  Nehemiah  was  appointed  governor 
of  Judea,  and  specially  commissioned,  by  decree  of  the  King,  to 
build  the  walls  of  Jerusalem — (b).  If  llollin's  Chronology  were 
correct  his  position  would  be  good.  He  locates  the  seventh  of  Ar- 
taxerxes B.C.  467,  instead  of  B.C.  457,  as  Usher,  and  others; 
and  the  twentieth  of  Artaxerxes  B.C.  454,  instead  of  B.C.  445, 
as  Usher  and  others.  But  we  believe  the  "seventy  weeks"  dates 
from  the  commandment  to  Ezra. 

Having  discovered  very  near,  if  not  the  exact  year  to  date  the 
beginning  of  the  famous  "seventy  weeks,"  we  now  have  to  look  after 
that  period  between  either  the  seventh  or  the  twentieth  of  Artaxerxes, 
and  the  first  of  Zedekiah,  in  order  to  learn  how  long  it  was  from  the 

(&)  See  Hist,  of  the  Persians  and  Grecians,  Chap.  1.  Sec.  6. 


12  The  Divine  Calling  of 

latter  to  the  birth  of  Christ;  for  that  is  the  point  upon  which  Mr, 
S.  claims  that  he  has  wrecked  the  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon, and  the  prophetic  mission  of  Joseph,  the  Seer.  From  the 
first  of  Zedekiah,  (2  Chron.  36  : 10),  to  the  seventh  of  Artaxerxes — 
and  the  "commandment"  to  Ezra  to  "restore"  Jerusalem. — (Ezra 
7  :  7),  is  one  hundred  and  forty-two  years.  To  this  add  four  hun- 
dred and  fifty-seven  and  we  have  five  hundred  and  ninty-nine  years 
to  A.D.  1.  Or,  taking  Rollings  dates,  we  have  the  last  of  Zedekiah 
in  B.C.  589,  to  which  the  eleven  years  of  his  reign  should  be  added, 
and  we  have  six  hundred  years  to  A.D.  1,  instead  of  "just  five  hun- 
dred and  fifty-three  years  from  the  first  of  Zedekiah  to  Messiah,"  as 
is  so  boastfully  claimed  by  Mr.  S. 

We  could  wish  that  the  chronology  of  the  past  was  more  perfect, 
but  imperfect  as  it  is  we  can  approximate  the  truth,  and 
that  answers  the  practical  purposes  of  the  case.  In  the  confessed 
defective  state  of  chronology,  especially  that  prior  to  A.D.  30,  we 
are  quite  safe  in  trusting  the  dates  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  They 
may  be  trusted  as  safely,  at  least,  as  any.  One  thing  we  have  dem- 
onstrated, and  that  is,  that  Mr.  S.  has  grievously  erred  in  his  state- 
ments on  time,  in  his  interpretation  of  Daniel,  and  in  these  bitter 
and  groundless  charges  against  the  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon and  the  prophetic  character  of  Joseph  the  Seer.  In  his  ma- 
levolent haste,  he  has  plunged,  as  we  have  seen,  into  an  error  of 
forty-seven  years  in  reckoning  time;  and  he  also  errs  in  his  state- 
ment that  "the  first  year  of  Zedekiah  began  the  seventy  years  cap- 
tivity," (of  the  Jews).  It  began  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  in  the 
fourth  year,  or  about  B.C.  606— (c). 

PLACE  OF  CHRIST'S  BIRTH. 

In  the  next  place,  Mr.  S.  undertakes  to  show  that  the  Book  of 
Mormon  is  false  from  its  statement  that  Christ  should  be  born  "at 
Jerusalem." — (Alma  5  :  2).  Now,  if  Mr.  S.  had  quoted  the  context, 
the  reader  of  his  article  could  have  seen  at  a  glance  what  was  meant 
by  Alma.  I  will  quote  it,  "And  behold,  he  shall  be  born  of  Mary, 
at  Jerusalem,  which  is  the  land  of  our  forefathers."  We  have  no 
apologies  to  ofier  for  the  grammatical  construction  of  this  passage; 
what  we  wish  to  know  is,  ichat  it  means.  That  it  refers  more  es- 
pecially to  the  vicinity  of,  and  not  necessarily  to  the  very  limits 
within  the  city,  is,  I  think,  quite  apparent.  The  word  at,  is  a  prep- 

(c)  Vide  Jer.  25  : 11-18;  2  Chron.  35  :  5-7;  Rollin,  Hist.  Assyrians,  Chap.  2. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  13 

osition;  and  primarily  signifies  nearness,  presence;  as,  at  the  sea; 
at  the  grave;  at  the  river;  etc.,  etc.  Some  suppose,  and  not  with- 
out reason,  that  Bethlehem,  of  Judea,  the  birth-place  of  our  Savior, 
was  a  suburb  of  Jerusalem,  and  could,  in  that  sense,  be  reckoned  a 
part  of  Jerusalem.  Mr.  S.  states  that  "the  Bible  often  affirms  that 
he  was  born  at  Bethlehem."  We  deny  it.  It  often  affirms  that  he 
was  born  m  Bethlehem. 

When  considering  the  import  of  the  text  in  question,  it  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  Alma  was  many  thousand  miles  away  from 
the  place  of  which  he  speaks,  and  therefore  his  description  of  it, 
relatively,  was  eminently  proper,  and  sufficiently  plain  for  all  but 
those  who  would  "make  a  man  an  offender  for  a  word/7 

MELCHIZEDEK  PRIESTHOOD. 

Mr.  S.  says,  that  "the  Book  of  Mormon  clashes  with  the  Bible  in 
its  claims  concerning  the  Melchizedek  priesthood  under  the  law/' 

It  does  claim  that  there  were  many  besides  Melchizedek  who  were 
priests  of  the  Melchizedek  order,  not  "under  the  law,"  though  some 
of  them  lived  during  the  times  of  "the  law/' 

Mr.  S.  argues,  substantially,  that  Israel  had  no  other  than  Aaronic 
priests,  and  they  only  under  the  law.  Moses  was  a  priest,  (Ps.  99  : 
6),  and  officiated  as  such,  (Ex.  24 : 4-8),  before  Aaron  and  his 
sons  were  set  apart  to.  minister  in  the  priest's  office,  (Ex.  28  : 1). 
Now,  as  there  are  but  two  orders  of  priesthood  mentioned  in  the 
Bible,  we  think  that  he  must  be  assigned  to  one  of  those  two  orders. 
And  inasmuch  as  he  held  priestly  authority  and  power  over  both 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  before  and  after  they  were  set  apart,  are  we  not 
forced  to  conclude  that  he  held  the  higher  priesthood,— the 
Melchizedek  ? 

Certainly,  Mr.  S.,  rash  as  he  is,  will  not  dare  say  that  Moses  was 
not  a  priest;  nor  can  he  with  truth  say  that  he  was  an  Aaronic 
priest.  To  what  order  lie  would  assign  him  it  is  difficult  to  con- 
jecture; yet  of  one  thing  we  may  rest  assured,  he  will  not  allow  that 
he  was  a  Melchizedek  priest,  for  that  would  utterly  spoil  his  argu- 
ment; for  he  claims  that  oidy  Melchizedek  and  Christ  were  priests 
of  that  order.  If  Moses  belonged  to  neither  the  Melchizedek  nor 
the  Aaronic  orders,  then  he  must  have  belonged  to  some  other  order. 
Will  Mr.  S.  please  arise  and  explain ;  for  he  would  have  it  that  only 
Christ  and  Melchizedek  belonged  to  the  one  order ;  and,  only  Aaron 
and  his  sons  to  the  other;  nevertheless  Moses  was  a  priest  of  God, 


14  The  Divine  Calling  of 

and  the  leading  type  of  Christ.     Will  Mr.  S.  say  that  he  was  a  sore 
of  provisional  priest, — a  make-shift,  and  belonging  to  no  order  ? 

We  believe  that  Moses  was  truly  a  priest,  and  that  he  was  not  an 
Aaronic  priest,  either,  but  that  he  was  a  Melchizedek  priest,  and 
hence  was  a  fit  type  of  the  Lord  Christ.  Abel  was  evidently  a 
priest,  (Gen.  4:3-5);  so  also  was  Noah,  (Gen.  8:20,  21);  so 
Abraham,  (Gen.  22  : 13);  and  so  Jacob,  (Gen.  31  :  54;  46  : 1);  so 
also  was  Job,  (Job  1:5;  42  :  8),  who,  it  is  probable,  was  not  a 
Hebrew.  Nor  is  this  all,  for  Jethro  was  evidently  a  priest,  accredited 
and  honored  of  God;  for, — 

"Jethro,  Moses1  father-in-law,  took  a  burnt  offering  and  sacrifices  for  God ; 
and  Aaron  came,  and  all  the  elders  of  Israel,  to  eat  bread  with  Moses'  father-in- 
law  before  God."— Ex.  18  : 12. 

That  this  eating  "bread"  was  a  religious  ceremony,  (like  the 
sacrament  under  the  gospel),  and  not  ordinary  feasting,  is  seen  in 
the  fact  that  it  was  done  "before  God,"  under  the  administration  of 
a  "priest,"  and  at  a  season  when  this  priest  offered  "a  burnt  offering 
and  sacrifices  for  God" 

Furthermore,  that  Jethro  was  a  priest  accepted  and  ordained  of 
God,  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  Aaron,  and  all  the  elders  of  Israel, 
honored  his  ministrations  by  their  presence,  and  did  "eat  bread" 
with  him,  which  they  would  not  have  done  if  he  had  not  been  a 
priest  of  God  ministering  in  righteousness.  That  he  was  a  priest  of 
God  is  further  evident  from  the  fact  that  he  "rejoiced  for  all  the 
goodness  which  the  Lord  had  done  to  Israel,"  (Ex.  18  :  9),  in  de- 
livering them  from  Egypt;  and  from  the  fact  that  he  said,  "Blessed 
be  the  Lord  who  hath  delivered  you  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Egyp- 
tians;" and  from  the  still  greater  fact,  that  he  gave  to  Moses  im- 
portant, acceptable,  and  highly  enlightened  counsel  in  regard  to  the 
organization  and  government  of  Israel.  To  Moses  he  said : 

"Hearken  now  unto  roy  voice,  I  will  give  thee  counsel,  and  God  shall  be 
with  thee;  *  *  *  So  Moses  hearkened  to  the  voice  of  his  father-in-law,  and 
did  all  that  he  said.11— Ex.  18  : 19,  24. 

Certainly  an  idolatrous  priest  would  not  have  proffered  counsel, 
especially  such  wise  counsel.  And,  it  is  furthermore  certain  that 
Moses  would  not,  for  one  moment,  have  received  counsel  from  any 
other  than  a  priest  of  God.  To  say  that  Jethro  was  an  idolatrous 
priest  would  be  to  say  that  God  taught  superior  wisdom  to  his  own 
minister,  Moses,  through  an  idolater. 

Inasmuch  then  as  Jethro  was  a  priest  of  God,  he,  too,  must  have 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  15 

belonged  to  one  of  the  two  orders — Melchizedek,  or  Aaronic.  If 
we  say  that  he  was  an  Aaronic  priest,  we  deny  the  Bible  account; 
but  if  we  say,  that  he  was  a  Melchizedek  priest,  then  we  say,  that 
which  is,  we  think,  conclusive  to  every  intelligent,  unprejudiced 
mind. 

Besides  those  priests  already  mentioned  there  were  others,  not  of 
the  order  of  Aaron,  who  did  minister  before  the  Lord  with  accept- 
ance, between  Moses  and  Christ:  Samuel,  (1  Sam.  7:9);  David, 
(2  Sam.  6  : 18) ;  Elijah,  (1  Kings  18  :  30-38).  These,  with  others, 
officiated  as  priests  with  favor  before  the  Lord;  for  the  Lord  an- 
swered their  ministrations  with  blessing.  And,  inasmuch  as  all  these 
aforementioned  persons,  some  of  whom  were  not  even  of  Israel,  did 
minister  in  the  rites,  ceremonies,  and  ordinances  of  the  priesthood, 
both  before  and  after  the  times  of  Moses,  either  by  the  command- 
ment, or  with  the  approval  of  Grod,  is  it  unreasonable,  or  contrary  to 
the  Scriptures  to  believe,  or  claim,  that  God  did  call  persons  on  this 
continent,  in  ancient  times,  to  minister  in'the  priesthood,  as  is 
taught  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  ?  But  enough  on  this  topic  for  the 
present;  we  shall  have  occasion  to  consider  the  subject  of  the  priest- 
hood at  greater  length  ere  we  conclude  this  review. 

TITHES. 

Another  huge  stumbling-stone,  one  upon  which  Mr.  S.  proposes 
to  wreck  Mormonism,  he  finds  in  the  saying  of  Alma,  that  "our 
father  Abraham  paid  tithes  of  one  tenth  part  of  all  he  possessed." 
Alma  10  :  1.  Mr.  S.  tells  us  that  "tithes"  "means  a  tenth/'  This 
we  deny.  "Tithes"  means  tenths',  or  may  mean  a  tax,  a  revenue 
arising  from  titbings;  and  this  latter  is  clearly  the  sense  in  which 
Alma  wished  to-  be  understood.  The  word  "tithes"  may  mean  the 
sum  total  of  what  is  gathered  by  tithing,  as  an  amount  of  revenue 
gathered  und!er  the  order  of  tithing.  Mr.  S.  says  the  text  from 
Alma,  "Our  father  Abraham  paid  tithes  of  one-tenth  part  of  all  he 
possessed,"  states,  in  effect,  that  Abraham  paid  "a  tenth  of  one 
tenth  part  of  all  ^he  possessed  ,*  *  *  which  would  be  only  a 
hundredth."  Now  we  venture  the  assertion,  that  no  sensible,  hon- 
est person,  unless  he  be  blinded  by  prejudice,  would  ever  put  such 
a  construction  upon  the  passage.  The  manifest  meaning  of  the 
passage  is  this :  Abraham  paid  tithes  composed  of  one  tenth  part  of 
aU  that  he- possessed. 


1.6  The  Divine  Calling  of 

Here  is  a  text  from  Deut.  26  : 12,  which  we  present  for  the  future 
•consideration  and  critical  labor  of  Mr.  S.  Perhaps  we  may  next 
•hear  of  his  undertaking  to  prove  Moses  a  false  prophet,  and  the 
Bible  a  humbug,  because  the  text  is  so  very  like  the  offensive  one 
irom  Alma:  "When  thou  hast  made  an  end  of  tithing  all  the  tithes 
-of  thine  increase  the  third  year."  This  was  the  commandment  to 
the  people  of  Israel,  and  refers  directly  to  the  manner  in  which  they 
should  pay  their  tithing  as  may  be  further  seen  from  Deut.  14  :  28. 
Would  it  not  be  consistent  now  for  Mr.  S.  to  set  himself  vigorously 
-at  it  to  write  another  work,  warning  the  people  against  Moses 
and  the  Bible,  because  that  in  the  Bible  Moses  instructs  Israel  in 
"tithing  all  the  tithes"  of  their  increase?  Mr.  S.,  with  his  critical 
tact,  could  easily  prove  the  Bible  false,  and  Moses  an  impostor ! 
Why,  Moses!  you  command  "tithing  all  the  tithes!"  You  are  as 
faulty  as  Alma!  Why — that  would  give  you  only  a  "tenth  of  one 
tenth  part,  which  would  be  only  a  hundredth !"  Leaving  this  matter 
•between  Moses  and  Mr.  S.,  we  pass  on. 

AARONIC  PRIESTHOOD. 

Mr.  S.  objects  that,  "The  Book  of  Mormon  locates  the  Aaronic 
•priesthood  among  the  descendants  of  Manasseh,  instead  of  Levi,  in 
opposition  to  the  Bible."  It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  this 
particular  priesthood  is  called  the  Aaronic  or  Levitical,  in  order  to 
distinguish  it  from  the  higher  or  Melchizedek;  and  because  that  in 
the  organized  Mngdom  or  commonwealth  of  Israel,  it  was  delegated 
to  Aaron  and  his  seed.  But  we  are  not  aware  of  any  passage  in 
the  Bible  that  would  prevent  the  scattered  branches  of  Israel,  or 
-those  who  become  "Abraham's  seed,  and  heirs  according  to  the 
promise,"  from  holding  and  exercising  the  same  or  similar  priest- 
hood authority  as  did  Aaron  and  his  seed,  with,  or  without  the 
ceremonial  law.  But  how  does  Mr.  S.  know  that  those  of  Manas- 
-seh's  seed  whom  he  mentions  were  professedly  priests  of  the  Aaronic 
order?  They  do  not  claim  to  be  of  that  order;  and  the  Latter  Day 
Saints  do  not  claim  that  they  were.  Mr.  S.  simply  assumes  as  much, 
and  then  undertakes  to  prove  it  by  quoting, 

"And  it  came  to  pass  that  I,  Nepal,  did  consecrate  Jacob  and  Joseph,  that 
'they  should  be  priests."— 2  Nephi  4:  5. 

There  is  here  not  even  the  slightest  hint  that  they  were  Aaronic 
priests.  As  we  have  before  seen,  there  were  many  priests  among 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  17 

the  people,  both  before  and  after  the  giving  of  the  law,  who  were 
not  called  Aaronic  priests. 

God  never  had  a  special  people  whom  he  did  not  bless  with  priest- 
hood privileges  and  powers,  whether  during  the  times  of  the  Patri- 
archs, or  from  Moses  to  Christ,  or  under  the  gospel  dispensation. 
And  inasmuch  as  the  Nephites  were  a  righteous  people  and  specially 
favored  of  God,  it  is  but  reasonable  to  suppose  that  they  would  en- 
joy the  privileges  and  benefits  of  the  priesthood.  It  is  not  impossible 
or  improbable,  that  the  Nephites  held  priesthood  similar,  or  identical 
with  that  of  Aaron.  The  text  is  silent  on  this  point,  yet  Mr.  S. 
assumes  that  it  claims  Aaronic  priesthood.  But  of  this  priesthood 
matter,  more  hereafter. 

SECOND  COMING  OF  CHRIST. 

The  next  objection  urged  is,  that  "the  Book  of  Mormon  conflicts 
with  the  Bible  in  locating  the  second  coming  of  Christ  in  the  past," 
because  it  states  that  Christ  appeared  to  the  Nephites  "within  a 
year  after  his  crucifixion." — Book  of  Nephi  5:5.  Christ  said, 

"Other  sheep  I  have,  which  are  not  of  this  fold;  [in  Judea]  them  also  I  must 
bring,  and  they  shall  hear  my  voice" — John  10: 16. 

Now,  inasmuch  as  he  was  "not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the 
house  of  Israel,"  (Matt.  15  : 21),  it  must  follow  that  the  "other 
sheep"  were  "of  the  house  of  Israel,"  and  they  not  in  Judea. 
Christ's  ministry  before  his  crucifixion  was  confined  to  Judea;  so  that 
the  fulfillment  of  this  promise  must  have  been  accomplished  after 
his  crucifixion,  and  in  another  locality  than  Judea,  and  to  others  of 
"the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel"  than  those  dwelling  in  Judea. 
The  Book  of  Mormon,  and  that  only,  affords  the  true  meaning  of 
Christ's  words,  and  in  that  we  find  an  easy  and  rational  solution  of 
the  otherwise  unanswerable  questions  as  to  ivhen,  where,  and  how, 
this  promise  of  Jesus  had  its  fulfillment.  For  it  states  (Book  of 
Nephi  Y  :  2)  that  Jesus,  after  his  resurrection  did  minister  in  teach- 
ing a  branch  of  the  "lost  sheep,"  the  Nephites  on  this  continent. 
Christ  certainly  appeared  to  Paul  some  years  after  he  had  ascended 
to  the  Father,  for  Paul  testifies:  1  Cor.  15  :  8: 

"And  last  of  all  he  was  seen  of  me  also,  as  of  one  born  out  of  due  time.11 

Now  it  is  evident  that  Paul  saw  him  as  truly  and  as  literally  as 
did  any  of  the  apostles.  This  is  the  sense  of  his  testimony.  Again : 

"Have  I  not  seen  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord?11 — 1  Cor.  9: 1. 


18  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"The  God  of  our  fathers  hath  chosen  thee,  that  thou  shouldest  know  his  will, 
and  see  that  Just  One,  and  shouldest  hear  the  voice  of  his  mouth."— Acts 
22:  14. 

These  texts  teach  the  personal  appearing  of  Jesus  to  Paul. 
But  further : 

"And  the  night  following  the  Lord  stood  by  him,  and  said,  Be  of  good  cheer, 
Paul;  for  as  thou  hast  testified  of  me  in  Jerusalem,  so  must  thou  bear  witness 
also  at  Rome.11— -Acts  23: 11. 

That  Paul  actually  saw  the  Lord  Jesus  on  earth,  personally,  we 
further  learn  from  the  direct  testimony  of  Barnabas. 

"But  Barnabas  took  him,  [Paul],  and  brought  him  to  the  apostles,  and  de- 
clared unto  them  how  he  had  seen  the  Lord  in  the  way,  and  that  he  had  spoken 
unto  him." — Acts  9:  27. 

This  puts  the  matter  beyond  question,  that  Paul  not  only  saw  the 
"light  from  heaven"  and  "heard  a  voice/'  but  that  he  likewise 
actually  and  literally  saw  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  heard  "the  voice  of 
his  mouth"  "in  the  way"  going  to  Damascus,  i. e.,  in  the  highway. 

It  seems  from  Eusebius  that  the  early  Christians  believed  that 
Christ  appeared  to  many,  after  his  ascension.  He  says: 

"Besides  these,  ['Cephus,1  'tho  twelve,1  lfive  hundred  brethren  at  once,' 
'James1],  there  still  was  a  considerable  number  who  were  apostles  in  imitation  of 
the  twelve,  such  as  Paul  himself  was,  he  [Paul]  adds,  saying,  'afterwards  he 
appeared  to  all  the  apostles.1 " — Eccl.  Hist.  42. 

By  this  we  learn  that  these  last  mentioned  "apostles"  were  others 
besides  the  first  "twelve"  and  Paul,  and  they,  too,  saw  Christ. 
Again,  Paul  says  he  appeared  unto  "the  twelve;"  i.  e.,  evidently, 
after  his  ascension,  for,  after  the  death  of  Judas  there  was  but  "the 
eleven,"  until  after  the  ascension.  And  again,  Paul  says  he  ap- 
peared to  "above  five  hundred  brethren  at  once/'  The  facts  of  his- 
tory favor  the  idea  that  there  was  no  assemblage  after  the  crucifixion, 
of  so  many  Saints,  (especially  brethren"),  until  after  the  ascension. 
Evidence  is  abundant  that  our  Savior  appeared,  personally,  to  many 
in  Judea,  after  his  ascension.  Mr.  S.  says  this  appearance  to  Paul 
"was  a  vision;"  by  which  he  probably  means  a  trance,  ecstasy,  or 
spiritual  view.  That  the  word  often  signifies  this,  we  know;  but  in 
Paul's  case  it  certainly  signifies  something  different,  as  is  apparent 
from  the  different  descriptions  given  of  it.  The  first  and  most 
natural  meaning  of  the  word  vision  is  literal,  natural,  actual  sight. 
In  this  sense  it  is  used,  no  doubt,  in  respect  to  Paul's  seeing  Christ; 
also  in  Luke  2-1 :  23,  where  it  is  said  that  certain  women  "had  also 


Joseph  Smitli  Defended. 


seen  a  vision  of  angels,  which  said  that  he  was  alive/'  That  this  is 
the  true  sense  may  be  seen  by  consulting  Luke  24  :  4-10.  So  also 
of  Luke  1  :  11,  22,  where  Zachariah  saw  the  angel  Gabriel,  "on  the 
right  side  of  the  altar  of  incense,"  in  "a  vision/'  Why  should  it  be 
thought  strange  that  Christ  appeared  on  earth  after  his  ascension, 
and  before  his  second  coming?  We  read  in  the  Scriptures  of  his 
appearing  to  some  many  years  before  his  first  coming,  such  as  to 
Nebuchadnezzar,  for  instance  : 

uLo,  I  see  four  men  loose,  walking  in  the  midst  of  the  fire,  and  they  have  no 
hurt;  and  the  form  of  the  fourth  is  like  the  Son  of  God."—  Dan.  3:  25. 

Again,  to  Abraham,  Gen.  18  :  13,  17,  20,  26,  30;  to  Jacob,  Gen. 
32  :  30,  and  to  Moses,  Ex.  3  :  2,  4,  Ex.  6:3.  Of  these  last  men- 
tioned appearances,  and  others,  Eusebius  makes  these  judicious  re- 
marks, — 

"That  the  divine  word,  therefore,  pre-existed  and  appeared,  if  not  to  all,  afc' 
least  to  some,  has  been  thus  briefly  shown."  —  Eccl.  Hist.  18, 

He  further  says,  (what  must  be  evident  to  every  candid,  intelligent 
mind),  that, 

t:To  suppose  these  divine  appearances  were  the  forms  of  subordinate  angels 
and  servants  of  God,  is  inadmissible;  since,  as  often  as  any  of  these  [angels]  ap- 
peared to  men,  the  Scriptures  do  not  conceal  the  fact  in  the  name,  expressly- 
saying  that  they  were  called  not  G-od,  nor  Lord,  but  [only]  angels."  —  EccL 
Hist.  11. 

Now,  inasmuch  as  Christ  appeared  to  his  people  before  his  first 
advent,  and  to  Paul,  and  others  in  Judea,  after  his  resurrection  and 
ascension,  it  is  not  unscriptural,  nor  incredible,  that  he,  after  his 
ascension,  should  appear  to  his  people  on  this  continent,  as  stated  in 
the  Book  of  Mormon,  especially  when  we  consider  his  promise,  that 
"other  sheep"  than  those  in  Judea  should  hear  Jus  voice.  Christ's 
first  coming  was  to  dwell  with,  and  minister  for  his  people;  and  his 
second  coming  is  for  the  same  purpose.  His  appearance  at  divers 
times  after  his  ascension,  including  his  resurrection,  can  no  more  be 
called  his  second  or  third  coming,  than  his  various  appearances  be- 
fore his  incarnation  could  be  called  his  first  coming.  Christ  did 
"appear"  to  Paul,  and  doubtless  to  others  after  his  ascension;  and 
he  will  "appear"  again  to  all  his  'Saints,  at  his  glorious  coming  and 
kingdom  to  dwell  with  them  in  regal  power  and  glory  forever  and 
ever.  These  events  will  differ,  not  in  regard  to  their  literality,  or 
being  personal;  but  in  the  surrounding  circumstances,  and  in  the 
results. 


20  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"THE  SCRIPTURE  WHICH  SAITH." 

Mr.  S.  next  finds  a  "clash/'  where  there  is  none;  and  in  this  he 
•'evidently  strives  to  excel.     He  says. 

uln  the  book  of  Ether,  sixth  chapter,  purporting  to  have  been  written  many 
-centuries  before  the  first  advent,  and  to  have  been  translated  and  transcribed  by 
Moroni,  wo  read  concerning  'the  scripture  which  saith,  there  are  they  who 
^were  first,  who  shall  be  last;  and  there  are  they  who  were  last,  who  shall  be 
•first.1  Mark  this  point,  [says  Mr.  S.],  as  none  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
were  then  written,  what  scriptures  can  here  be  referred  to  but  those  in  the 
JjsTew  Testament,  where  we  find  similar  language.1" 

In  reply  we  have  to  say,  first,  that  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
<do  not  contain  all  the  scriptures  as  Mr.  S.  would  seem  to  claim; 
;and  in  the  second  place,  the  words  he  quotes  are  the  words  of 
"Moroni,  who  lived  four  hundred  years  after  Christ,  and  not  the 

words  of  Ether,  as  he  falsely  claims;  and  lastly  they  are  not  the 

words  of  the  New  Testament  at  all. 

"NO  VARIABLENESS." 

He  next  objects: 

•"In  the  fourth  chapter  of  the  book  of  Mormon  we  read,  lFor  do  we  not  read 
fchat  God  is  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever ;  and  in  him  is  no  varia- 
bleness, neither  shadow  of  changing?"  Yes,  [says  Mr.  S.],  we  'read1  it,  but 
where?  In  the  New  Testament,  which  claimed  to  be  unknown  to  Mormon." 

If  Mr.  S.  had  been  as  eager  to  learn  the  genuine  spirit  and  doc- 
trine of  the  Book  of  Mormon  as  he  has  been  to  conjure  up  faults, 
and  to  manufacture  errors,  he  would  have  found  divers  places  where 
the  sentiments  of  the  passage  he  quotes  are  written. 

In  Mosiah  1  :  8,  is  a  passage  having  this  import;  and  in  Nephi 
11  : 1 :  "I  am  the  Lord,  I  change  not;"  and  in  2  Nephi  12  :  7:  "I 
-am  the  same  yesterday,  to-day  and  forever;"  and  then  in  Alma  5:3: 
'"Neither  doth  he  vary  from  that  which  he  hath  said;  neither  hath 
lie  a  shadow  of  turning  from  the  right  to  the  left."  Moroni  pro- 
fessed to  quote  only  the  sense  of  what  they  read,  and  not  letter  for 
letter;  and  surely,  he  had  abundant  grounds,  as  we  have  seen,  from 
the  records  of  his  fathers. 

In  the  next  place  he  objects  to  the  following  passage  found  in 
Moroni  8:2:  "The  whole  need  no  physician,  but  they  that  are  sick;" 
^'language  borrowed,  [he  says],  from  the  Savior/' 

Now  the  text,  with  its  context,  reads  as  follows : 

"And  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  me  [Mormon]  ly  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  saying,  Listen  to  the  words  of  Christ,  your  Redeemer,  your  Lord  and 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  21 

your  God.  Behold,  I  came  into  the  world,  not  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sin- 
ners to  repentance;  the  whole  need  no  physician,  lut  they  that  are  sick;  wherefore 
little  children  are  whole,  for  they  are  not  capable  of  committing  sin." 

Here  we  see  that  the  passage  does  not  purport  to  be  '-borrowed1' 
from  any  place,  but  that  it  was  a  direct  revelation  from  Christ  to 
Mormon. 

If  we  are  to  condemn  the  Book  of  Mormon  because  sentiments 
and  phrases  are  found  in  it  similar  to  those  found  in  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  then  we  may  condemn  the  book  of  Micah,  because 
in  its  fourth  chapter  there  is  found  a  prophecy  similar  in  sense  and 
letter  to  that  found  in  Isaiah,  second  chapter.  We  may  go  further 
and  condemn  the  Bible  because  in  it  are  phrases  and  sentiments 
similar  to  those  found  in  the  Brahmin's  Veda,  which  claims  to  be 
the  oldest  of  books,  and  which  was  compiled  as  early,  at  least,  as  B. 
C.  1200.  In  it  is  a  prayer  similar  to  that  taught  by  our  Savior,  "O 
God  have  mercy,  give  me  my  daily  bread/' — Rig-Veda  6  :  47. 
Shall  we  say  that  because  Jesus  taught  similarly,  that  he,  therefore, 
"borrowed''  from  the  Veda?  We  should,  if  we  adopted  the  reason- 
ing of  Mr.  "S.  Again,  (Rig- Veda  9  :  113,  7):  "Where  life  is  free, 
in  the  third  heaven  of  heavens,  where  the  worlds  are  radiant,  there 
make  me  immortal.'7  The  logic  of  Mr.  S.  would  make  David  and 
Paul  borrow  some  of  these  ideas,  and  some  of  this  language,  from 
the  Rig- Veda ! 

ZEND-AVESTA. 

Again;  in  the  Zend-Avesta  there  are  many  ideas  and  phrases 
similar  to  what  is  found  in  both  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Of 
this  Dr.  Haug  remarks: 

"The  Zoroastrian  religion  exhibits  a  very  close  affinity  to,  or  rather  identity 
with,  several  important  doctrines  of  the  Mosiac  religion  and  Christianity." — 
Chips  from  a  German  Workshop,  p.  125. 

There  is  one  place  in  it  where  the  Supreme  Spirit  proclaims  him- 
self "I  am  who  I  am;7' — a  similar  name  to  that  of  Jehovah  given 
by  him,  Ex.  3  :  14.  Now,  shall  we  argue  from  these  coincidences 
that  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  or  any  part  of 
them,  have  been  copied — "borrowed" — from  those  ancient  books? 
The  fallacious  method  of  reasoning  adopted  by  Mr.  S.  would  force 
us  to  do  so.  The  Book  of  Mormon  claims  that  the  same  God  who 
inspired  the  prophets  and  seers  in  Judea,  inspired  prophets  and 
seers  in  America,  whose  writings  we  find  in  the  Book  of  Mormon. 


22  The  Divine  Calling  of 

This  being  true,  ifc  is  no  wonder  that  we  find  the  same  general  ideas, 
the  same  doctrines  and  phrases  in  the  Book  of  Mormon,  that  we 
find  in  the  Bible.  Of  this  the  Lord  says: 

' Therefore,  I  speak  the  same  words  unto  one  nation  like  unto  another. 
And  when  the  two  nations  shall  run  together,  the  testimony  of  the  two  nations 
shall  run  together  also.  And  I  do  this  that  I  may  prove  unto  many,  that  I  am 
the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever;  and  that  I  speak  forth  my  words  ac- 
cording to  mine  own  pleasure." — 2  Xephi  12:7. 

Will  Mr.  S.  have  us  believe  that  two  or  more  revelations  from 
God  to  as  many  different  persons,  at  as  many  different  times,  touch- 
ing the  same  things,  must  differ  in  sentiment,  and  in  phraseology ! 

It  would  seem  so,  for  he  is  condemning  the  Book  of  Mormon  on 
the  ground  that  in  it  are  found  sentiments  and  phrases  similar  to 
those  found  in  the  Bible. 

CHRISTIAN. 

Here  comes  another  insurmountable  stumbling  block  in  the  way 
of  Mr.  S.  He  says : 

"The  Book  of  Mormon  blunders  into  the  claim  that  about  one  hundred  years 
before  the  first  advent,  the  name  'Christian1  was  in  common  use  on  this  con- 
tinent; thus  clashing  with  the  Bible  which  affirms,  'the  disciples  were  first 
called  Christians  at  Antioch.' — Acts  11:  26." 

That  the  disciples  upon  the  eastern  continent  were  "first  called 
Christians  at  Antioch,"  we  do  not  deny;  and  that  this  was  all  that 
Luke  intended,  must  be  apparent  to  every  fair-minded  reader. 
Luke  did  not  claim  to  write  by  revelation  or  prophecy;  and  as  a 
historian  he  only  wrote  of  facts  as  he  knew  and  believed  them.  He 
referred  only  to  those  connected  with  the  Church  of  Christ  on  the 
Eastern  Continent,  and  did  not  profess  to  know  or  write  of  matters 
beyond  that.  But  the  statement  that  people  on  this  continent  were 
called  Christians,  even  "one  hundred  years  before  the  first  Advent," 
Mr.  S.  cannot  disprove.  The  very  name,  as  well  as  the  doctrine 
and  mission  of  Christ,  was  known  hundreds  of  years  before  the  first 
Advent.  So  also  that  other  prominent  New  Testament  name  of  our 
Savior, — "Son  of  God/'  If  the  leading  New  Testament  names  of 
our  Savior  were  known  and  used  so  long  before  the  first  Advent, 
why  should  it  be  thought  incredible  that  one  of  the  leading  New 
Testament  names  of  his  disciples  should  likewise  be  known  and  used 
equally  as  long  before  ?  The  Nephites  foreknew  the  name,  and  mis- 
sion, and  peculiar  doctrines  of  Christ,  hundreds  of  years  before  the 
Advent,  and  they  lived  in  conformity  with  his  gospel,  and  why 


Joseph.  Smith  Defended.  23 

might  they  not  be  called  by  a  name  in  their  language  that  was  the 
exact  equivalent  of  the  English  word  "Christian?"  For  my  part  I 
can  see  no  reason  against  it,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  many  good 
reasons  for  it.  Eusebius  informs  us  that: 

"The  very  name  of  Jesus,  as  also  that  of  Christ,  was  honored  by  the  pious 
prophets  of  old.  *  *  *  Moses  attaches  the  name  of  our  Savior  Jesus  Christ; 
*  *  *  the  prophets  that  lived  subsequently  to  these  times,  also  plainly  announced 
Christ  before  by  name" — Eccl.  Hist.,  pp.  21,  22. 

Again  he  says: 

"For  as  the  name  Christians  is  intended  to  indicate  this  very  idea,  that  a  man, 
by  the  Jcnowkdge  and  doctrine  of  Christ,  is  distinguished  by  modesty  and  justice, 
by  patience  and  a  virtuous  fortitude,  and  by  a  profession  of  piety  towards  the 
one  and  only  true  and  supreme  God ;  all  this  was  no  less  studiously  cultivated 
by  them  than  by  us." — p.  26. 

Moses,  we  are  told  by  Paul,  esteemed  "the  reproach  of  [for]  Christ 
greater  riches  than  the  treasures  of  Egypt/'  Moses,  then  knew 
something  of  Christ  and  of  his  doctrine,  as  did,  no  doubt,  some  of 
his  people. 

THE  PLATES. 

Mr.  S.  next  undertakes  to  make  a  conflict  between  the  Book  of 
Mormon  and  the  testimony  of  Joseph,  in  regard  to  the  disposal  of 
the  plates  after  Joseph  translated  them.  The  Book  of  Mormon  says 
concerning  Joseph : 

"Wherefore,  when  thou  hast  read  the  words  which  I  have  commanded  thee, 
and  obtained  the  witness  which  I  have  promised  thee,  then  shalt  thou  seal  up 
the  book  again  and  hide  it  up  unto  me.11 

Now,  Mr.  S.  says  that  it  is  claimed  by  Mr.  John  Taylor  that  the 
plates  "when  he  [Joseph]  got  through  translating,  they  were  deliv- 
ered again  to  the  angel."  "So  [says  Mr.  S.],  he  did  not  hide  up 
the  plates,  as  stated  in  the  Book  of  Mormon."  The  Book  of  Mor- 
mon does  not  state,  nor  even  intimate,  the  manner  in  which  Joseph 
was  to  "hide  up"  the  plates.  There  are  very  many  ways  in  which 
we  may  "hide  up"  plates,  or  other  things,  without  putting  them 
into  the  ground  as  is  urged  by  Mr.  S. 

To  hide  up  anything  is  to  conceal  it,  to  secure  it,  or  screen  it 
from  public  observation.  This  was  certainly  done  when  the  plates 
were  put  into  the  hands  of  the  angel. 

THE  THREE  DISCIPLES. 

Mr.  S.  objects  that  Jesus  is  made  to  say  to  three  of  his  disciples: 

"Ye  shall  never  endure  the  pains  of  death;  but  when  I  come  in  my  gloryt 


24  The  Divine  Calling  of 

ye  shall  be  changed  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  from  mortality  to  immortality.1' 
— Nephil3:3. 

And  that: 

uln  the  next  paragraph  it  is  added,  'whether  they  were  mortal  or  immortal, 
from  the  day  of  their  transfiguration  I  know  not.1  *  *  *  Nephi  says  he  did  not 
know  whether  they  were  mortal  or  immortal — equivalent  to  saying  that  he  did 
not  know  whether  Christ  lied  or  told  the  truth." 

It  is  not  infrequent  that  people,  even  disciples  of  Christ,  are  told 
that  which  they  do  not  fully  understand  when  told.  Jesus  told  his 
disciples  in  Judea  to  go  and  "preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature;7' 
yet  it  required  no  less  than  a  miracle,  and  another  command,  to 
make  Peter  Jcnow,  fully,  the  nature  and  scope  of  his  mission,  (Acts 
10  : 19-35).  Jesus  foretold  the  facts  of  his  death  and  resurrection, 
yet  his  disciples  did  not  intelligently  believe  him  on  this  point,  till 
after  his  resurrection  and  appearance  unto  them. 

Mr.  S.,  who  professes  to  be  a  disciple  of  Christ,  does  not  believe 
in  a  pre-millennial  kingdom,  yet  Christ  plainly  teaches  it  in  Matthew 
25:1;  13:47-49,  and  elsewhere.  Mr.  S.  also  believes  that 
the  Adventists  are  the  "wise  virgins'1  of  Matthew  25  : 4,  and  that 
they,  since  A.D.  1833,  have  been  sounding  the  midnight  cry;  where- 
as Christ  says  the  midnight  cry  comes  to  [not  from]  the  wise,  as  well 
as  to  the  foolish  virgins,  and  that  it  finds  them  asleep,  or  slumber- 
ing. Mr.  S.  believes  also  that  while  they  have  been  sounding  the 
midnight  cry,  for  the  past  forty  or  more  years,  Christ,  "the  bride- 
groom tarried;"  whereas  Christ  says,  that  after  the  midnight  cry  is 
made  there  is  no  tarrying,  and,  that  so  sudden  would  be  the  coming 
of  the  bridegroom,  that  the  foolish  virgins  would  not  have  time  to 
get  the  needed  oil  to  fill  their  lamps.  Now,  because  Mr.  S.  and 
his  co-religionists  believe  contrary  to  what  Christ  says,  or  because 
they  at  least  fail  to  believe  what  he  does  say,  would  it  not  be  indeli- 
cate, not  to  say  unchristian-like,  for  us  to  charge  that  their  want  of 
intelligent  belief  is  "equivalent  to  saying  they  did  not  know  whether 
Christ  lied  or  told  the  truth?"  We  think  so. 

PEOPLE  OF  ZARAHEMLA. 

Here  another  terrible  fault  is  conjured  up.     He  says : 

uThe  first  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Omni  represents  Mosiah  as  going  from  the 
land  of  Nephi  to  Zarahemla,  about  three  hundred  years  after  Nephi  reached 
America;  'and  they  discovered  a  people  who  were  called  the  people  of 
Zarahemla.  Now  there  was  great  rejoicing  among  the  people  of  Zarahemla; 
and  also  Zarahemla  did  rejoice  exceedingly  because  the  Lord  had  sent  the 
people  of  Mosiah  with  the  plates  of  brass  which  contained  the  record  of  the 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  25 

Jews.'  In  the  next  paragraph  we  are  told,  [says  Mr.  S.],  their  language  had 
become  corrupted;  and  they  had  brought  no  records  with  them;  and  they  de- 
nied the  being  of  their  Creator;  and  Mosiah,  nor  the  people  of  Mosiah  could 
understand  them,  Yet,  [says  Mr.  S.],  the  same  paragraph  tells  us  that  they 
came  out  of  Jerusalem  at  the  time  Zedekiah  was  taken  to  Babylon — about  three 
hundred  years  previously.  At  this  time  they  rejoiced  that  the  Lord  had  sent 
Mosiah,  and  yet  did  not  believe  that  there  was  a  Lord  in  existence.  Glad  of 
the  records,  yet  could  not  understand  each  other's  language — their  language 
having  been  so  corrupted  in  a  little  over  three  hundred  years." 

A  more  shameful  effort  at  garbling  texts  is  seldom,  if  ever,  seen 
than  this.  It  would  put  the  most  unblushing  infidel  critic  to  shame. 
Amaleki  records  the  fact,  that  Mosiah,  being  warned  of  God,  fled 
out  of  the  land  of  Nephi,  and  went  to  the  land  of  Zarahemla,  both 
he  and  others  who  accompanied  him. 

"And  they  discovered  a  people  who  were  called  the  people  of  Zarahemla. 
Now,  there  was  great  rejoicing  among  the  people  of  Zarahemla;  and  also 
Zarahemla  did  rejoice  exceedingly,  because  the  Lord  had  sent  the  people  of 
Mosiah  with  the  plates  of  brass  which  contained  a  record  of  the  Jews.1' 

This  ugreat  rejoicing"  took  place  evidently,  not  when  the  people 
were  first  discovered  by  Mosiah  and  his  company,  but  when  the 
people  of  Zarahemla  became  acquainted  thoroughly  with  the  new 
immigrants, — their  doctrines  and  their  tidings, — as  we  shall  further 
see : 

"Behold,  it  came  to  pass  that  Mosiah  discovered  that  the  people  of  Zara- 
hemla came  out  from  Jerusalem  at  the  time  that  Zedekiah,  king  of  Judah,  was 
carried  away  into  Babylon.  *  *  *  And  at  the  time  that  Mosiah  discovered  them, 
they  had  become  exceeding  numerous.  Nevertheless,  they  had  many  wars 
and  serious  contentions,  and  had  fallen  by  the  sword  from  time  to  timer  and 
their  language  had  become  corrupted;  and  they  had  brought  no  records  with 
them;  and  they  denied  the  being  of  their  Creator;  and  Mosiah,  nor  the  people 
of  Mosiah,  could  understand  them.  But  it  came  to  pass  that  Mosiah  caused 
that  they  should  be  taught  in  his  language.n 

There  is  nothing  contradictory  in  this  brief  narrative;  neither 
anything  impossible  or  incredible.  Amaleki  first  states  the  fact  of 
the  discovery  of  Zarahemla  and  his  people,  and  then  states,  as  one 
of  the  results,  that  there  was  "great  rejoicing."  But  he  does  not 
intimate  that  this  rejoicing  took  place  immediately  upon  the  dis- 
covery, but  after  the  people  of  Zarahemla  could  understand  Mosiah 
and  his  people,  and  had  been  instructed  by  them.  Furthermore,  it 
was  at  the  time  of  their  discovery,  and  also  before  it,  that  the  peo- 
ple of  Zarahemla  denied  the  being  of  their  Creator;  and  at  that 
time  it  was  that  "the  people  of  Mosiah"  could  not  understand  them. 

Mr.  S.  argues  that  it  is  incredible  that  these  two  peoples,  having 


26  The  Divine  Calling  of 

a  common  origin,  coming  from  the  same  country  about  three  hun- 
dred years  before,  could  have  so  corrupted  their  language  as  not  to 
understand  each  other.  If  Mr.  S.  was  instructed  in  philology,  or 
was  very  observant  of  current  facts,  he  would  know  that  there  was 
nothing  improbable  in  it;  especially  when  we  consider  that  they  of 
Zarahemla  "brought  no  records  with  them."  Language  changes 
constantly  among  all  nations,  and  among  some  far  more  rapidly  than 
with  others;  and  that,  too,  where  they  have  an  extensive  literature 
— or  "records."  It  would  be  next  to  impossible  for  the  English 
speaking  nations  of  to-day  to  understand  the  English  of  but  a  few 
hundred  years  ago.  So  great  have  been  the  changes  of  language  in 
England,  alone,  that  people  from  one  shire  cannot  well  understand 
those  of  another.  The  languages  of  men,  like  their  forms  of  religion, 
are  subject  to  rapid  and  extensive  change.  Max  Muller.  M.  A., 
Fellow  of  All  Souls'  College,  Oxford,  England,  a  competent  au- 
thority says : 

"The  meaning  of  words  changes  imperceptibly  and  irresistibly.  Even  where 
there  is  a  literature,  and  a  printed  literature,  like  that  of  modern  Europe,  four  or 
five  centuries  work  such  a  change  that  few  even  of  the  most  learned  divines  in 
England  would  find  it  easy  to  read  and  to  understand  accurately  a  theological 
treatise  written  in  England  four  hundred  years  ago.  The  same  happened,  and 
happened  to  a  far  greater  extent,  in  ancient  languages.  Xor  was  the  sacred 
character,  attributed  to  certain  writings,  any  safeguard." — Chips  From  a  German 
Workshop,  p.  130. 

These  facts  amount  to  conclusive  proof  in  favor  of  what  is  said  in 
regard  to  the  language  of  the  people  of  Zarahemla  having  become 
so  corrupted,  as  stated  by  ximaleki. 

PLATES  OF  ETHER, 

Mr.  S.,  in  the  following,  undertakes  to  show  that  there  are  very 
damaging  contradictious  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  in  its  statements 
concerning  the  plates  written  and  hid  up  by  Ether.  Now  it  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  one  class  of  these  statements  is  prophetic, — 
fortelling  what  should  occur  with  the  plates, — another,  giving  com- 
mands touching  their  disposal;  and,  lastly,  the  purely  historical 
account  of  their  origin,  transmission,  and  final  disposition.  Whilst 
the  first  claims  to  be  fully  inspired,  the  latter  makes  no  such  claim. 
Prophecy  and  history  are  two  quite  different  things.  The  one 
claims  absolute  divine  perfection,  in  its  sense,  its  import,  and  in  all 
its  facts;  while  history — Bible  history — Scripture  history — seldom 
makes  such  claim.  Scripture  history  claims  to  be  essentially  true 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  27 

in  its  statements,  but  it  does  not  usually  claim  to  have  been  written 
with  such  full  measure  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  to  secure  it  against 
verbal  errors,  and  even  errors  in  some  of  its  minor  and  unimport- 
ant facts. 

DEFECTS  IN  SCRIPTURE  HISTORY. 

When  we  reflect  one  moment  upon  the  discrepancies — omissions 
and  contradictions — between  the  Books  of  the  Chronicles  and  the 
Books  of  the  Kings,  between  the  four  several  gospels,  and  between 
the  four  gospels  and  the  Acts;  also  between  the  Acts  and  the  Old 
Testament  history,  we  see  the  folly  of  claiming  for  the  writers  of 
those  books  what  they  never  claim  for  themselves,  i.  e .,  full  and 
absolute  inspiration. 

As  to  prophecy,  holy  men  and  women  speak  as  they  are  "moved 
upon  by  the  Holy  Ghost;"  but  history  is  a  narration  of  matters  as 
the  writers  know  them,  understand  them,  and  believe  them.  Hence 
Luke  (1  :  13),  thought  it  good  to  write  what  he  knew,  and  believed, 
and  had  a  "perfect  understanding  of,"  as  it  had  been  delivered  to 
him  by  those  who  "from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses  and  minis- 
ters of  the  word.  Luke  did  not  claim  to  write  by  direct  revelation 
from  God  to  himself,  but  simply  what  he  had  learned  from  persons 
who  were,  as  he  believed,  competent  witnesses.  Luke  omits  many 
facts  found  in  the  three  other  gospels,  but  these  omissions  do  not 
invalidate  anything  he  may  have  written,  and  no  one  but  a  quib- 
bling critic  would  argue  as  much.  The  evangelists  differ  widely  in 
regard  to  the  crucifixion  and  resurrection  of  Christ,  yet  this  differ- 
ence arises  mainly,  if  not  entirely,  from  omissions — some  failing  to 
write  just  the  same  things  that  were  written  by  others.  In  the 
Acts  three  different  accounts  are  given  of  the  conversion  of  Saul, 
(9  :  3-20;  22  :  6-16;  26  :  12-18).  In  these  there  is  considerable 
discrepancy,  and  some  direct  contradiction.  This  could  not  occur  if 
all  Scripture  history  was  fully  and  perfectly  inspired  of  God.  Again 
Paul,  that  faithful,  devoted  servant  of  Christ,  takes  occasion  to  in- 
form us  that  some  of  his  writings  were  not  indited  under  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Holy  Spirit.— (1  Cor.  7  :  6,  12,  25,  40;  2  Cor.  8  : 
8:  11  : 17,  &c.) 

Now,  inasmuch  as  Bible  historians  did  not  always  profess  to 
write  under  the  full  inspiration  of  God's  unerring  Spirit,  are  we 
justified  in  demanding  of  those  who  wrote  Scripture  history  on  this 
continent,  that  their  historical  writings  shall  be  so  fully  and  perfectly 


28  The  Divine  Calling  of 

inspired  of  God,  as  to  be  absolutely  full  and  complete,  and  without 
error  in  letter,  or  defect  in  matter'/  We  think  not.  Such  a  claim 
by  those  versed  well  in  Scripture  matters  exhibits  unfairness,  preju- 
dice, or  ignorance.  But  we  do  not  admit  the  contradictions  claimed 
by  Mr.  S.  We  utterly  deny  them,  except,  possibly,  in  one  point, 
and  that  one  of  no  essential  historical  value. 
He  says : 

1.  uMoroni  says  the  plates  found  by  the  people  of  Limhi  were  kept  by  king 
Benjamin,  that  the  world  should  not  see  them ;  but  the  Book  of  Mosiah  says 
that  the   people  of  Limhi  did  not  find  the  plates  till  after  king  Benjamin 
was  dead. 

2.  "Moroni  testifies  that  they  were  not  to  be  translated  till  after  Christ  wag 
'lifted  up  upon  the  cross;'  but  the  book  of  Mosiah  informs  us  that  they  were 
translated  by  king  Mosiah,  'and  caused  to  be  written,'  even  hundreds  of  years 
before  the  crucifixion  ;  and  yet  Moroni  pretends  to  translate  them  again  after 
the  cross. 

3.  uMoroni  informs  us  that  the  stone  interpreters  of  the  brother  of  Jared 
were  sealed  up  with  the  plates  ;  but  the  book  of  Mosiah  makes  no  mention  of 
finding  stones  with  the  plates,  though  Amrnon  talks  to  Limhi  about  stone  inter- 
preters possessed  by  Mosiah  off  in  a  distant  land.     What  became  of  these  scal- 
ed interpreters? 

4.  4tMoroni  tells  us  that  Jared's  brother's  stone  interpreters  were  sealed  up 
with  the  plates  that  Limhi's  people  found,  for  the  express  purpose  of  enabling 
the  finders  to  translate  them  ;  yet,  according  to  the  book  of  Mosiah,  the  finders 
could  not  translate  them,  not  finding  with  the  plates  anything  but  swords  and 
breast-plates  ;  and  finally,  Ammon  tells  king  Limhi  that  Mosiah  'hath  where- 
with he  can  translate,'  called  interpreters  ;  and  after  a  while  the  plates  are  car- 
ried over  to  Mosiah  in  Zarahemla,  arid  Mosiah  translates  them  with  his  own 
interpreters  'set  in  two  rims  of  a  bow.'     But  what  became  of  the  interpreters 
that  were  sealed  up  with  those  plates  found  by  Limhi's  people? 

5.  "Mosiah  not  only  had  interpreters  before  receiving  the  twenty-four  plates 
found  by  the  people  of  Limhi,  but  he  had  previously  exercised  his  gift  of  inter- 
preting languages,  and  his  uncle  before  him.  also,  by  which  Ammon  knew  that 
he  possessed  this  gift ;  and  an  instance  is  given  of  its  exercise  in  a  book  written 
by  Omni,  before  the  book  of  Mosiah :  'And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days  of  Mosiah, 
there  was  a  large  stone  brought  unto  him,  with  engravings  on  it ;  and  he  did 
interpret  the  engravings,  by  the  gift  and  power  of  God.'     So  Mosiah  did  not 
need  the  interpreters  of  Jared's  brother ;  but  still  the  question  continues  to 
come  up,  since  they  were  sealed  at  God's  bidding,  what  became  of  them  ? 
And,  as    Moroni    claims  to    have    had    them,   where  did    he    get    them  ? 
After  Moroni  represents  God  as  saying  to  Jared's  brother,  'These  two  stones 
will  I  give  unto  thee,  and  ye  shall  seal  them  up  also' — that  is,  with  the  plates — 
'wherefore  I  will  cause  in  mine  own  due  time  that  these  stones  shall  magnify  to 
the  eyes  of  men  these  things  which  ye  shall  write.'     Moroni  adds,  'After  Christ 
had  truly  showed  himself  unto  his  people,  he  commanded  that  they  should  be 
made  manifest.  *  *  *  Behold  I  have  written  upon  these  plates  the  very  things 
that  the  brother  of  Jared  saw.'    Again  he  adds,  'I  am  commanded  that  I  should 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  29 

hide  them  up  again  in  the  earth,  *  *  *  and  he  also  hath  commanded  that  I 
should  seal  up  the  interpretation  thereof;  wherefore  I  have  sealed  up  the  inter' 
prefers.'  Where  did  he  get  them,  seeing  they  were  not  found  when  the  people 
of  Limhi  found  the  twenty-four  plates,  with  which  they  were  hid  ? 

6.  "Mosiah's  stone-interpreters,  'set  in  two  rims  of  a  bow,1  which  he  possess- 
ed previous  to  the  finding  of  these  twenty-four  plates  by  the  people  of  Limhi, 
'were  prepared  from  the  beginning,  and  were  handed  down  from  generation  to 
generation,  for  the  purpose  of  interpreting  languages'  (Mosiah,  12th  chapter); 
while  the  'two  stones1  possessed  by  the  brother  of  Jared  were  given  to  him  by 
the  Lord  after  confounding  the  language  at  the  tower,  without  any  'rims  of  a 
bow.1  But  when  Nephi  came  to  America,  he  was  very  careful  to  tell  us  about 
bringing  Laban's  sword,  Lehi's  compass,  and  the  brass  plates  taken  from  Laban, 
but  not  a  word  about  these  precious  stone  interpreters,  which  'were  prepared 
from  the  beginning,  and  were  handed  down  from  generation  to  generation.' 
Where  did  Mosiah  get  his  interpreters,  seeing  they  were  not  imported  from 
Jerusalem,  and  seeing  preceding  generations  on  this  continent  were  unknown 
to  him  till  after  he  possessed  those  interpreters?  Here  is  another  puzzle,  or 
crooked  story." 

Precisely,  Mr.  S.  As  you  have  rendered  it,  it  is  a  "puzzle;" 
and  as  you  have  told  it,  it  is  a  "crooked  story/'  It  is  a  fair  speci- 
men of  your  work.  Your  garbled  quotations,  your  unfair  inferences, 
and  brazen  misstatements,  have  perverted  the  facts  and  quite  dis- 
torted the  entire  account. 

Allowing  that,  possibly,  there  is  a  mistake  in  the  person's  name 
who  is  said  to  have  kept  the  plates  of  Ether  and  the  interpreters, 
(Ether  1  :  11),  a  matter  of  no  historical  moment  as  affecting  the 
value  of  the  record, — (Moroni  claims  to  be  writing  only  a  small 
abridgment,  Ether  1:1,  and  to  write  from  memory,  Ether  2:1, 
and  no  intimation  is  given  that  he  writes  in  a  way  to  preclude 
possibility  of  verbal  errors,  such  as  in  names,  etc.) — allowing  that  it 
should  have  been  Mosiah,  instead  of  Benjamin,  your  second  state- 
ment is  quite  untrue,  viz,  that  Moroni  said  "they  [the  plates]  were 
not  to  be  translated  till  after  Christ  was  'lifted  up  upon  the  cross/  " 
It  was  not  the  plates  of  Ether,  as  a  whole,  but  the  remarkable  things 
seen  and  heard  by  the  brother  of  Jared  when  in  the  presence  of  the 
Lord  upon  the  mount: 

"And  the  Lord  commanded  the  brother  of  Jared  to  go  down  out  of  the  mount 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  write  the  things  which  he  had  seen  [in  the 
mount] ;  and  they  were  forbidden  to  come  unto  the  children  of  men,  until  after 
that  he  should  be  lifted  up  upon  the  cross;  and  for  this  cause  did  King  Benja- 
min keep  them,  that  they  should  not  come  unto  the  ivorld,  until  after  Christ 
should  shew  himself  unto  his  people." — Ether  1: 11. 

Your  statement  that,  "Moroni  pretends  to  translate  them  [the 


30  The  Divine  Calling  of 

plates]  again  after  the  cross/'  is  wholly  without  foundation.  The 
account  states  that  he  abridged  what  he  found  on  the  plates  of 
Ether;  and  he  professed  to  give  but  a  part  only  of  what  he  there 
found : 

"I  [Moroni]  give  not  the  full  account,  but  a  part  of  the  account  I  give,  from 
the  tower  down  until  they  [the  Jaredites]  were  destroyed.11 — Ether  1:1.  See 
also  paragraph  9. 

You  next  state  that  "the  book  of  Mosiah  makes  no  mention  of 
finding  stones  [interpreters]  with  the  plates/'  Suppose  it  does  not, 
does  that  omission  prove  that  they  were  not  with  the  plates?  It 
proves  nothing  of  the  kind.  Matthew  omits  many  things  concern- 
ing Jesus  which  John  and  others  mention.  These  omissions  by 
Matthew  disprove  nothing  written  by  John  and  others,  nor  do  they 
invalidate  either  account.  Paul,  in  the  description  of  his  remark- 
able conversion,  as  told  to  King  Agrippa,  (Acts,  26  :  12-19),  omits 
some  important  items  from  the  account  which  himself  gives  of  it  at 
another  time  before  the  Jews — (Acts,  22  :  6-16).  He  omits  to  tell 
King  Agrippa  the  important  fact,  that  he  was  blinded  by  "the  glory 
of  that  light,"  and  that  he  was  "led  by  the  hand  of  them  that  were 
with"  him.  He  omits  to  tell  how  Ananias  came  and  instructed  him, 
and  said  unto  him,  "Brother  Saul,  receive  thy  sight/'  and  how 
Ananias  commanded  him,  saying,  "Arise,  and  be  baptized,  and 
wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord."  All  these, 
and  many  more  omissions  are  found  in  comparing  the  different 
accounts  of  Paul's  conversion,  but  these  do  not  invalidate  each  other, 
even  though  they  are  found  in  the  same  book,  and  written  by  one 
and  the  same  person. 

The  Book  of  Mosiah  is  simply  silent  upon  the  point  as  to  whether 
•:the  two  stones"  given  to  Jared's  brother  were  found  by  the  people 
of  Limhi  with  the  twenty-four  gold  plates  of  Ether,  or  not;  yet  it 
is  implied,  from  Mosiah  12  :  3,  that  they  were  with  the  plates  when 
found.  For  it  is  said : 

11  And  now  he  [Mosiah]  translated  them  by  the  means  of  those  two  stones 
which  were  fastened  into  the  two  rims  of  a  bow." 

This  is  the  account  that  Mormon,  the  father  of  Moroni,  gives. 
He  is  the  one  who  translated  and  greatly  abridged  the  records 
handed  down  to  him;  and  he  says:  "I  cannot  write  the  hundredth 
part  of  the  things  of  my  people." — Words  of  Mormon  1:2.  It  is 
Mormon  who  says  that  Mosiah  translated  the  plates  found  by  the 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.          .          31 

people  of  Limhi,  by  "means  of  those  stones  which  were  fastened 
into  the  rims  of  a  bow." 

STONE   INTERPRETERS. 

Your  next  statement  that  "Ammon  talks  to  Limhi  about  stone 
interpreters  possessed  by  Mosiah  off  in  a  distant  land,"  is  entirely 
untrue.  Ammon  does  not  mention  "stone  interpreters."  What  he 
said  to  Limhi,  touching  the  matter  of  translation,  reads  as  follows : 

"Xow  Ammon  said  imto  him,  I  can  assuredly  tell  thee,  0  King,  of  a  man  that 
can  translate  the  records  :  for  he  has  wherewith  he  can  look,  and  translate  alii 
records  that  are  of  ancient  date  ;  and  this  is  a  gift  from  God." 

DIRECTORS. 

Now  Mosiah  the  first,  as  we  may  call  him,  who  was  a  great  pro- 
phet, and  who  lived  some  years  before  Mosiah  the  second,  was  pos- 
sessed of  the  gift  and  means  of  interpretation.  "He  did  interpret 
the  engravings  [found  upon  'a  large  stone']  by  the  gift  and  power 
of  God." — Omni  1:9.  To  interpret  is  to  translate,  to  unfold,  to 
explain,  or  reveal,  to  make  known  what  before  was  hidden  or  mys- 
terious. That  this  means  was  handed  down  with  the  records  to 
Benjamin,  and  then  to  his  son  Mosiah,  is  highly  probable,  if  not 
absolutely  certain;  for  we  read  that  "the  sacred  things,"  which  in- 
cluded "the  records  which  were  engraven  upon  the  plates  of  brass," 
[containing  the  five  books  of  Moses,  the  records  of  the  Jews  down 
to  the  first  of  Zedekiah,  also  the  prophecies  of  the  prophets  down  to 
and  including  much  of  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah]  (d).  "And 
also  the  plates  of  Nephi,  and  also  the  sword  of  Laban,  and  the  ball 
or  director,  which  led  our  fathers  through  the  wilderness,  which  was 
prepared  by  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  that  they  thereby  might  be  led, 
even  according  to  the  heed  and  diligence  which  they  gave  unto 
him"(e),  were  to  be  "handed  down  from  one  generation  to  another, 
or  from  one  prophet  to  another"  (/). 

This  may  serve  to  explain  why  we  find  Mosiah  the  first  (#),  Mo- 
siah the  second  (7i),  and  Ameliki(i),  all  conversant  with  the  fact, 
and  possessing  the  means  of  interpreting  languages.  For  it  is  cer- 
tain that  the  wonderful  "directors"  given  to  Lehi,  and  "handed 
down  from  one  prophet  to  another,"  was  an  important  means  of 
revelation  and  divine  instruction  to  those  prophets.  In  describing 

(d)  I  Nephi  1  r  46.    (e)  Meeiah  1 :  3,    (/)  1  Nephi  5  :  47.    (g)  Omiii  1  r  9. 
(7i)  Mosiah- 1  r3.      (i)  Omni  1 :12. 


32  The  Divine  Calling  of 

their  importance  and  utility,  also  the  manner  in  which  instruction, 
guidance  and  revelation  were  obtained  by  them,  Nephi  says : 

"And  there  was  also  written  upon  them  a  new  writing,  which  was  plain  to 
be  read,  which  did  give  us  understanding  concerning  the  way  of  the  Lord  ;  and 
it  was  written  and  changed  from  time  to  time,  according  to  the  faith  and  dili- 
gence we  gave  unto  it." — 1  Nephi  5  :12. 

Here  is  a  means  of  revelation  given  to  Lehi,  and  handed  down 
from  one  prophet  to  another,  reaching  Mosiah  the  second,  by  which 
we  see  that  he  had  a  means  of  interpretation  besides  the  "two 
stones"  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  plates  of  Ether.  Of  the 
character  of  these  "directors"  we  further  learn  by  Alma's  instruc- 
tion to  his  son  Helaman:  '-And  now,  my  son,  these  directors  were 
prepared  that  the  word  of  God  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake, 
saying,  I  will  bring  forth  out  of  darkness  unto  light,  all  their  secret 
works,  and  their  abominations."  Thus  we  see  again  that  they  were 
a  means  of  revelation,  so  that,  as  Ammon  said,  Mosiah  had  "where- 
with he  can  look,  and  translate  all  records  that  are  of  ancient  date; 
and  it  is  a  gift  of  God." 

"INTERPRETERS." — "TWO  STONES." 

But,  further,  it  is  not  impossible  that,  in  the  providence  of  God, 
the  very  "two  stones"  given  to  the  brother  of  Jared  came  into  the 
possession  of  Mosiah  the  first,  and  so  passed  down  to  Mosiah  the 
second;  and  that  he  had  them  prior  to  the  time  of  his  receiving 
the  twenty-four  plates  of  Ether.  Coriantumr,  the  last  of  the  Ja- 
redites, was  discovered  by  the  people  of  Zarahemla,  and  "he  dwelt 
with  them  for  the  space  of  nine  moons." — Omni  1 : 10.  By  this 
we  learn  that  some  knowledge  of  the  Jaredites  was  had  by  the  peo- 
ple of  Zarahemla.  We  further  learn  that  something  of  the  history 
of  the  Jaredites  was  obtained  from  "a  large  stone,"  the  "engrav- 
ings" on  which  were  interpreted  by  Mosiah  the  first. — par.  9.  Here 
are  channels  through  which  much  was  learned  by  them  of  Zara- 
"hemla,  and  finally  by  them  of  Nephi  in  regard  to  the  Jaredites. 
And  might  it  not  be  that  "the  two  stones"  given  to  Jared's  brother 
found  their  way  through  the  Zarahemlaites  to  Mosiah  the  first,  and 
so  to  Mosiah  the  second?  We  see  nothing  improbable  in  this; 
certainly  nothing  impossible. 

"INTERPRETERS"  SEALED  UP. 

You  next  state  that  "Moroni  tells  us  that  Jared's  brother's  stone 
interpreters  were  sealed  up  with  the  plates  that  Limhi's  people 


Joseph  Smith  Defended. 


found,  for  the  express  purpose  of  enabling  the  finders  to  translate 
them."  This  statement  is  not  true.  The  nearest  to  it  is  a  saying; 
of  Moroni  concerning  the  Lord's  instructing  the  brother  of  Jaredi 
as  follows  : 

"The  language  which  ye  shall  write  I  have  confounded;  wherefore  I  will* 
cause  in  my  own  due  time  that  these  stones  shall  magnify  to  the  eyes  of  menr 
these  things  which  ye  shall  write."  —  Ether  1:  10. 

Your  next  statement  that  "the  finders  [meaning,  probably,  the 
people  of  Limhi]  could  not  translate  them,  not  finding  with  the* 
plates  any  thing  but  swords  and  breast-plates,"  is  wholly  unwar- 
ranted. They  may  have  found  many  things  which  they  failed  to 
mention.  As  we  have  already  seen,  important  items  may  be  omitted* 
in  an  account  without  vitiating  that  account. 

Luke,  in  giving  his  account  of  the  sermon  on  the  mount,  omits* 
many  important  items  in  that  sermon,  when  we  compare  it  with 
Matthew.  What  folly  it  would  be  to  say  that  Jesus  really  taught 
at  that  time  only  what  Luke  mentions!  Also,  Luke  omits  a  part  of 
the  Lord's  prayer.  Matthew  fails  to  mention  the  fact,  time,  and' 
place  of  the  ascension  of  Christ.  Mark  omits  to  mention  the  earth- 
quake which  occurred  at  the  resurrection.  Matthew,  Luke,  and* 
John,  omit  to  mention  the  "young  man,  sitting  on  the  right  side,, 
[in  the  sepulchre],  clothed  in  a  white  garment."  —  Mark  16  :  5: 
And  all  but  John  fail  to  mention  the  "two  angels  in  white,  sitting; 
the  one  at  the  head  and  the  other  at  the  feet,  where  the  body  of 
Jesus  had  lain."  Now  these  omissions  are  just  as  important  and 
just  as  damaging,  as  is  that  in  regard  to  the  stone  interpreters.  All 
you  can  say  in  truth  is  that  Mosiah  does  not  mention,  directly,  that 
the  stone  interpreters  were  found  by  the  people  of  Limhi  with  the 
twenty-four  plates  of  Ether.  To  say  more  than  this  is  unwarranta- 
ble and  unfair. 

MR.  S.  PERVERTS  HISTORY. 

We  pass  by  your  fifth  paragraph,  as  we  have  already  answered 
and  refuted  what  you  there  say.  However,  the  latter  part  of  that 
paragraph,  where  you  say  again  that  the  interpreters  "were  not 
found  when  the  people  of  Limhi  found  the  twenty-four  plates,  with 
which  they  were  hid,"  is  so  like  your  former  self,  that  we  will  re- 
mind you  that  your  statement  is  naked  assumption.  You,  with 
characteristic  effrontery,  make  the  text  state  that  which  is  not  there. 
The  text  neither  states,  nor  implies,  that  the  interpreters  were  not 
found  with  the  plates. 


34  The  Divine  Calling  of 

MOSIAH'S  STONE  INTERPRETERS. 
/ 

Tou  assume,  as  usual,  that  "Mosiah's  stone  interpreters,"  "set  in 
'two  rims  of  a  bow,"  which  you  say  he  possessed  previously  to  the 
^finding  of  these  twenty-four  plates  by  the  people  of  Limhi,  ivere  not 
4ke  o)i(>»  given  to  the  brother  of  Jared.  This  we  have  before  shown 
is  utterly  groundless,  as  the  probabilities  are  that  they  were  the 
"very  ones  given  to  the  brother  of  Jared,  and  were  either  found  with 
the  plates  by  the  people  of  Limhi,  or  came  down  to  Mosiah,  the 
second,  and  his  predecessors,  by  way  of  the  Zarahemlaites;  for  the 
Zarahemlaites  knew  of  the  history  of  the  Jaredites  through  Co- 
riantumr,  the  last  Jaredite  king,  as  also  through  their  writings  on 
.stone,  as  we  have  already  seen. 

rj£be  "beginning"  mentioned,  is  most  probably  the  beginning  of 
'the  Jaredite  nation. 

INTERPRETERS,  HOW  OBTAINED. 

As  to  your  question  : 

^."Where  did  Mosiali  get  his  interpreters,  seeing  they  were  not  imported  out 
of  Jerusalem,  and  seeing  that  preceding  generations  on  this  continent  were 
.unknown  to  him  till  after  he  possessed  the  interpreters?" 

We  reply,  first,  he  had  two  ways  of  obtaining  the  interpreters 
given  to  Jared's  brother,  as  we  have  already  seen;  and,  in  the  next 
place,  it  is  possible  he  used  the  "directors"  as  interpreters,  for  we 
have  seen  that  they  were  a  prominent  and  efficient  means  of  divine 
revelation.  And  as  to  your  assumption  that  "preceding  generations 
on  this  continent  were  unknown  to  him  [Mosiah]  till  after  he 
possessed  these  interpreters/'  (namely,  those  deposited  with  the  plates 
found  by  the  people  of  Limhi),  we  reply  that  it  is  simply  false  to 
the  record,  and  you  owjlit  to  know  it.  For,  as  we  have  seen  before, 
the  knowledge  concerning  the  Jaredites  came  by  the  way  of  Cori- 
-antumr,  the  last  Jaredite  king,  who  lived  for  a  time  with  the 
'Zarahemlaites,  who  finally  became  identified  with  the  Nephites; 
2md,  likewise,  by  means  of  the  history  translated  by  Mosiah,  the  first, 
from  that  "large  stone." 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  35 


CHAPTEK  II. 

THE  INSPIRED  TRANSLATION. 

Mr.  S.  devotes  a  large  proportion  of  his  second  chapter  to  an 
endeavor  to  make  a  very  marked  contradiction  between  the  Book 
of  Mormon  and  the  Inspired  Translation  of  the  Bible,  in  the  teach- 
ings of  Christ.  He  urges  what  is  not  true,  that  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon agrees  precisely  with  our  common  version  of  the  Bible,  in 
respect  to  the  teachings  of  Jesus;  and  he  then  argues  that  if  the 
Book  of  Mormon  and  the  Inspired  Translation  were  both  true,  and 
divinely  inspired,  they  would  exactly  agree  in  language  and  in  fact. 

Now  it  happens  that  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  there  are  many 
things  taught  by  Christ  which  are  not  taught  in  the  New  Testament 
at  all.  In  the  next  place  sentiments  taught  by  our  Savior  in  the 
New  Testament  are  found  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  clothed  in  quite 
different  language.  For  instance : 

"Yea,  blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit  who  come  unto  me,  for  theirs  is  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.  *  *  *  *  And  blessed  are  all  they  who  do  hunger  and  thirst 
after  righteousness,  for  they  shall  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost"  — Nephi  5 : 9. 

The  words  in  italics  are  not  found  in  the  New  Testament  of  the 
common  version,  but  in  both  the  Book  of  Mormon  and  the  Inspired 
Translation.  Again;  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  it  is  written: 

"Ye  have  heard  that  it  hath  been  said  by  them  of  old  time,  and  it  is  also  ivritten 
before  you,  that  thou  shalt  not  kill;  and  whosoever  shall  kill  shall  be  in  danger 
of  the  judgment  of  God." — Nephi  5: 10. 

Again : 

"Therefore,  if  ye  shatt  come  unto  me-,  or  shall  desire  to  come  unto  me,  and 
rememberest  that  thy  brother  hath  aught  against  thee,  go  thy  way  unto  thy 
brother,  and  first  be  reconciled  to  thy  brother,  and  then  come  unto  me  with 
full  purpose  of  heart,  and  I  will  receive  you." — Ibid. 

As  before,  the  words  in  italics  are  not  found  in  the  common  ver- 
sion, nor  does  the  text  agree  exactly  with  the  Inspired  Translation. 
Now  these  quotations,  with  scores  of  others,  in  which  there  are 


36  The  Divine  Calling  of 

striking  verbal  differences  between  the  Book  of  Mormon  and  the 
common  version  in  regard  to  the  teachings  of  Christ,  show  con- 
clusively that  Joseph  Smith  did  not  copy  from  the  common  version, 
as  Mr.  S.  boldly  and  impudently  asserts.  He  says:  "The  fact  is, 
when  preparing  the  Book  of  Mormon  our  version  was  freely  used, 
with  all  its  defects."  The  reader  can  judge  from  the  above  how 
much  of  truth  there  is  in  this  statement. 

The  Inspired  Translation  does  not  profess  to  be  a  translation  of 
or  from  the  Book  of  Mormon,  but  only  to  be  a  translation,  in  part, 
of  the  Bible;  therefore  we  may  not  look  for  verbal  agreement  even 
where  the  same  principles  and  sentiments  are  taught.  In  many 
instances  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  texts,  professedly  from  Moses  and 
the  prophets,  are  found  to  differ,  verbally,  and  sometimes  in  senti- 
ment, widely,  from  the  common  version.  For  instance: 

"Hearken  and  hear  this,  0  house  of  Jacob,  who  are  called  by  the  name  of 
Israel,  and  are  come  forth  out  of  the  waters  of  Judah,  who  swear  by  the  name 
of  the  Lord,  and  make  mention  of  the  God  of  Israel,  yet  they  swear  not  in  truth 
nor  in  righteousness;  nevertheless  they  call  themselves  of  the  holy  city,  but  they 
do  not  stay  themselves  upon  the  God  of  Israel,  who  is  the  Lord  of  Hosts:  Yea, 
the  Lord  of  Hosts  is  his  name.  Belwld,  I  have  declared  the  former  things  from 
the  beginning;  and  they  went  forth  out  of  my  mouth,  and  I  shewed  them.  I 
did  show  them  suddenly,  and  I  did  it  because  I  knew  thou  wert  obstinate,  and 
thy  neck  was  an  iron  sinew,  and  thy  brow  brass;  and  I  have,  even  from  the 
beginning,  declared  to  thee,  before  it  came  to  pass  I  shewed  them  thee;  and 
shewed  them  for  fear  lest  thou  shouldst  say,  mine  idol  hath  done  them,  and  my 
graven  image,  and  my  molten  image  hath  commanded  them.  Thou  hast  seen 
and  heard  Sill  this;  and  will  ye  not  declare  them?'' — 1  Xephi  6:  1;  with  Isa. 
48:  1-6. 

Again : 

"The  word  that  Isaiah,  the  son  of  Amoz,  saw  concerning  Judah  and  Jeru- 
salem :  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days,  when  the  mountain  of  the 
Lord's  house  shall  be  established  in  the  top  of  the  mountains,  and  shall  be 
exalted  above  the  hills,  and  all  nations  shah*  flow  unto  it,  and  many  people  ghall 
go  and  say,  Come  ye,  and  let  us  go  up  to  the  mountain  of  the  Lord,  to  the 
house  of  the  God  of  Jacob ;  and  he  will  teach  us  of  his  ways,  and  we  will  walk 
in  his  paths ;  for  out  of  Zion  shall  go  forth  the  law,  and  the  word  of  the  Lord 
from  Jerusalem.  And  he  shall  judge  among  the  nations,  and  shall  rebuke 
many  people ;  and  they  shall  beat  their  swords  into  plough-shares,  and  their 
spears  into  pruning  hooks :  nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against  nation,  neither 
shall  they  learn  war  any  more.  0  house  of  Jacob,  come  ye,  and  let  us  walk  in 
the  light  of  the  Lord ;  yea,  come,  for  ye  have  all  gone  astray,  every  one  to  his  icicked 
way*. 

"Therefore,  0  Lord,  thou  hast  forsaken  thy  people,  the  house  of  Jacob,  be- 
cause they  be  replenished  from  the  east,  and  hearken  unto  soothsayers  like  the 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  37 

Philistines,  and  they  please  "themselves  in  the  children  of  strangers.  Their  land 
also  is  full  of  silver  and  gold,  neither  is  there  any  end  of  their  treasures — their 
land  is  also  full  of  horses,  neither  is  there  any  end  of  their  chariots:  their  land 
is  also  full  of  idols — they  worship  the  work  of  their  own  hands,  that  which 
their  own  fingers  have  made :  and  the  mean  boweth  not  down,  and  the  great 
man  humbleth  not  himself,  therefore,  forgive  him  not. 

"  0  ye  wicked  ones,  enter  into  the  rock,  and  hide  thee  in  the  dust,  for  the  fear 
of  the  Lord,  and  *  *  the  glory  of  his  majesty  shall  smite  thee.  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass  that  the  lofty  looks  of  man  shall  be  humbled,  and  the  haughtiness 
of  men  shall  be  bowed  down,  and  the  Lord  alone  shall  be  exalted  in  that  day. 
For  the  day  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts  soon  cometh  upon  all  nations;  yea,  upon  every 
one;  yea,  upon  the  proud  and  lofty,  and  upon  every  one  who  is  lifted  up;  and 
he  shall  be  brought  low."— 2  Nephi  8: 4,  5,  6;  with  Isa.  2: 1-12. 

The  words  in  italics  are  wanting,  or  differ  in  connection,  in  the 
common  version,  while  the  asterisks  indicate  that  in  those  places  in 
the  common  version  there  is  something  more  than  in  the  Book  of 
Mormon.  It  will  be  seen  on  careful  reading  that  the  sense  is  materi- 
ally better,  and  clearer,  in  the  texts  from  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon (y). 

The  extracts  here  given,  and  the  texts  cited,  utterly  disprove  the 
statement  of  Mr.  S.  that  the  common  "version  was  freely  used,  by 
Joseph,  with  all  its  defects/'  when  "preparing  the  Book  of 
Mormon/' 

The  thought  that  the  illiterate  young  man,  Joseph  Smith,  did 
copy  from  the  common  version,  making  all  these  important  changes 
in  the  texts,— and  changes  that  greatly  improve  the  texts, — is  quite 
groundless  and  inconsistent.  He  did  not  copy  from  the  common 
version.  He  was  not  qualified,  naturally,  for  making  those  impor- 
tant changes.  Nor  will  it  do  to  say  that  he  copied  from  Mr.  Spaul- 
ding's  manuscript;  for  no  intelligent  Presbyterian  minister  would 
dare  change  the  text  of  the  Bible,  as  it  is  everywhere  changed  in 
the  Book  of  Mormon.  In  its  language,  and  in  much  of  its  subject  mat- 
ter, it  agrees  with  neither  the  commen  version  nor  the  Book  of 
Mormon,  in  respect  to  the  teachings  of  Christ.  The  Book  of  Mor- 
mon does  not  claim  to  agree  with  either  the  Inspired  Translation  or 
the  common  version.  It  claims  to  be  a  record  given  to  another 
people,  under  somewhat  dissimilar  circumstances,  and  having  quite 
different  surroundings.  If  the  Book  of  Mormon  claimed  that  the 
teachings  of  Jesus,  as  therein  found,  were  identically  the  same  as 
that  which  he  gave  to  his  disciples  in  Judea,  then  we  might  expect 
the  Inspired  Translation  to  agree  with  it,  so  far  as  facts  and  senti- 

(j)  Sae  also  2  Nephi  »  :  9,  with  Isa.  51 : 17-20,  Ac. 


38  The  Divine  Calling  of 

merits  are  concerned;  but  not  necessarily  in  regard  to  forms  of  lan- 
guage, for  the  language  of  the  two  peoples  was  manifestly  different 
in  some  degree. 

In  translating  the  Book  of  Mormon  it  was  evidently  intended  to 
transfer,  so  far  as  practicable,  the  forms  of  speech  peculiar  to  the 
language  in  which  it  was  found;  while  in  the  Inspired  Translation 
the  apparent  object  seems  to  be,  (1),  to  restore  essential  parts  that 
had  been  taken  away,  especially  from  the  gospel,  and,  (2),  to  strike 
out  what  had  been  added  by  uninspired  men,  and,  (3),  to  give  the 
sense,  rather  than  the  form  of  speech,  in  those  passages  where  the 
meaning -was  ambiguous  and  the  sense  obscure.  Many  of  the  forms 
of  speech  peculiar  to  the  Israelites  of  eighteen  hundred  years  ago, 
and  well  adapted  to  their  modes  of  thought  and  expression,  are  quite 
unsuited  to  the  people  of  the  nineteenth  century,  so  great  has  been 
the  change  in  language.  And  it  is  not  at  all  surprising,  that  in 
correcting  and  translating  the  Scriptures  by  inspiration,  the  sense, 
rather  than  the  forms  of  the  text  should  be  given. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  is  a  work  quite  distinct  from  the  Inspired 
Translation;  and,  while  we  may  expect  that  there  will  be  no  con- 
siderable differences  between  the  two  records,  we  may  not  expect  to 
find  precisely  the  same  sentiments,  no  more  and  no  less,  taught  in 
both  of  them;  neither  to  find  the  same  forms  of  speech  even  when 
the  same  sentiments  are  taught  by  the  same  person.  The  same 
truths  may  be  and  often  are  taught  by  the  same  person  under  dif- 
ferent forms  of  language.  Man,  with  prolific  mind  and  facile  tongue, 
is  not  a  mere  machine  that  he  should  always  give  to  the  same 
thought  the  same  form  of  words,  as  Mr.  S.  would  argue. 

GRAMMAR. 

Mr.  S.  next  finds  fault  with  the  grammar  of  Joseph's  Inspired 
Translation,  and  quotes  Rev.  1  :  3,  as  a  specimen  of  it.  This  is  a 
specimen,  not  of  "Joseph's  grammar,"  but  that  of  King  James* 
translators'.  "The  Holy  Scriptures,  translated  and  corrected  by 
the  Spirit  of  Revelation,  by  Joseph  Smith  Jr.,  the  Seer,"  was  not 
a  translation  of  the  entire  text  of  the  common  version,  but  only  a 
translation  of  some  parts  of  it,  a  "correction"  of  others,  while  many 
parts  of  it  were  left  untouched.  Corrections  were  made  by  striking 
from  or  adding  to  the  text;  as  also  by  transferring  the  sense  of 
certain  texts  into  more  correct  and  suitable  forms  of  words,  but  the 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  39 

text  quoted  by  Mr.  S.  is  one  of  that  very  numerous  class  left  as  found 
in  the  text. 

As  for  the  matter  of  grammar,  there  is  no  little  difference  among 
grammarians  of  to-day  in  regard  to  it;  while  there  is  a  very  striking 
difference  between  those  of  the  present  and  those  of  preceding  times. 
The  translator^  of  the  "common  version"  were  very  learned  men, 
and,  no  doubt,  good  grammarians,  for  their  times.  We  should  not 
judge  them  hastily  by  our  standards,  lest  coming  generations, 
measuring  us  by  theirs,  pronounce  us  equally  faulty.  Grammar 
changes  with  the  education  and  tastes  of  the  people.  But  Mr.  S., 
with  characteristic  assurance,  tells  us,  that  "Inspiration  gives  the- 
language,  as  well  as  the  thoughts."  Hence  he  argues  that  Joseph's 
defective  grammar  (according  to  his  standard)  is  evidence  that  he 
was  not  a  prophet  of  God.  If  the  logic  of  Mr.  S.  was  valid,  it  would 
prove  that  the  Bible,  being  defective  in  its  grammatical  construction, 
was  not  inspired,  and  that  its  inspiration  would  come  and  go  accord- 
ing to  its  grammatical  or  ungrammatical  construction  or  translation. 
This  is  worse  than  nonsense. 

With  the  Germans,  and  other  nations,  it  is  a  rule  to  put  the  noun 
before  the  adjective,  thus — horse  black;  tree  tall;  woman  beautiful; 
but  with  the  English  speaking  nations  it  is  just  the  reverse — black 
horse;  tall  tree;  beautiful  woman.  That  usage  which  is  a  law 
among  the  one  people,  is  a  violation  of  law  with  the  others.  If 
inspiration  is  subject  to  the  laws  of  grammar  will  Mr.  S.  kindly  tell 
us  which  class  of  laws,  for  they  differ  widely,  as  we  see,  among  the 
different  nations.  Are  they  those  of  ZENODOTUS  of  Ephesus  ?  or 
ARISTOPHANES  of  Byzantium?  or  are  they  those  of  MURRAY  and 
KIRKHAM?  or  PINNEO  and  QUACKENBOSS  ?  Pray  tell  us,  Mr.  S.,. 
for  it  is  important  to  find  the  exact  and  only  grammatical  channel 
through  which  inspiration  may  come  to  us! 

We  apprehend  that  God  may  inspire  persons  to  speak  and  write 
irrespective  of  men's  notions  as  to  what  is  or  is  not  grammatical. 
The  chief  value  of  any  communication  depends,  not  upon  its  strictly 
grammatical  qualities,  but  upon  the  quality  and  amount  of  intelli- 
gence it  conveys.  The  loftiest  principles,  and  the  grandest  truths, 
are  often  found  in  broken  and  unpolished  sentences,  even  as  the 
purest  gold,  and  the  most  precious  gems,  are  found  with  the  confused 
quartz  or  the  shifting  sands.  The  sense  of  a  sentence  is  the  measure 
of  its  worth;  its  structure  is  of  secondary  importance.  As  the  style 


40  The  Divine  Calling  of 

of  garment  is  to  man,  so  is  the  form  of  language  to  sentiment — it  is 
its  clothing. 

If  Mr.  S.  persistently  objects  to  the  inspiration  of  a  work  on  the 
grounds  of  defective  grammar,  we  propose  that  he  enters  upon  a 
criticism  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  which  he  professes  to 
Jove  so  dearly,  and  to  believe  so  firmly,  and  then  inform  us  as  to 
whether  they  are  inspired  records  or  not.  As  to  inspiration  giving 
"the  language,  as  well  as  the  thoughts,"  it  is  true  in  part,  and  only 
in  part. 

DEGREES  OP  INSPIRATION. 

There  are  different  degrees  of  inspiration,  as  one  may  readily  see 
on  reading  the  Scriptures,  unless  they  are  blinded  by  prejudice  or 
be-fogged  by  the  commentaries,  creeds  and  catechisms  of  uninspired 
men.  That  degree  of  inspiration  which  gives  the  prophetic  word, 
and  the  open  vision,  is  greater  than  that  which  inspires  a  dream  or 
moves  to  write  current  history.  That  degree  that  enabled  Jesus  to 
know  what  was  in  man,  and  to  work  his  wondrous  miracles,  was  far 
greater  than  that  which  inspired  the  council  of  '-apostles  and  elders 
at  Jerusalem,"  (Acts  15  : 29),  or  that  which  moved  Paul  to  write 
the  seventh  chapter  of  First  Corinthians.  Paul  says:  "I  think  also 
that  I  have  the  Spirit  of  God."  The  degree  of  the  Spirit  which  he 
then  possessed  was  so  small  that  there  was  no  certainty  that  what 
he  wrote  at  that  time  was  inspired  of  God  at  all. 

If  inspiration  always  "gives  the  language,  as  well  as  the  thoughts," 
why  is  there  not  an  exact  verbal  agreement  between  the  evangelists 
when  they  describe  the  same  events,  or  rehearse  the  same  teachings  ? 
And  why  is  not  the  language  of  James,  and  John,  and  Jude,  as 
precise  and  scholarly  as  that  of  Paul  and  Luke  ?  And  why  is  there 
as  wide  a  difference  between  the  style  of  language  found  in  Ezekiel 
and  that  of  David,  or  Isaiah,  or  Solomon,  as  there  is  between  the 
terse  sentences  of  Josephus,  and  the  polished  periods  of  Gibbon  ? 
The  language  of  Habakkuk,  and  Job,  and  Nahum,  and  the  Psalms 
is  lofty  and  elegant,  while  that  of  Daniel,  Hosea  and  Malachi,  is 
plain,  vigorous,  and  unpoetic  in  comparison. 

Inspiration  is: — 

uThe  conveying  of  certain  extraordinary  and  supernatural  notions  or  motions 
into  the  soul;  or  it  denotes  any  supernatural  influence  of  G-od  upon  the  mind  of 
a  rational  creature,  whereby  he  is  formed  to  any  degree  of  intellectual  improve- 
.ment." 


Joseph  Smith.  Defended.  41 

These  are  the  judicious  remarks  of  Dr.  Buck,  and  their  propriety, 
we  think,  may  not  be  questioned.  He  further  aptly  says  in  regard 
to  the  various  measures  of  inspiration : 

"1.  An  inspiration  of  superintendency,  in  which  God  does  so  influence  and 
direct  the  mind  of  any  person,  as  to  keep  him  more  secure  from  error  in  some 
various  and  complex  discourse,  than  he  would  have  been  merely  by  the  use  of 
his  natural  faculties. 

"2.  Plenary  superintendent  inspiration,  which  excludes  any  mixture  of  error  at 
all  from  the  performance  so  superintended. 

"3.  Inspiration  of  elevation,  where  the  faculties  act  in  a  regular,  and,  as  it 
seems,  in  a  common  manner,  yet  are  raised  to  an  extraordinary  degree,  so  that 
the  composure  shall,  upon  the  whole,  have  more  of  the  true  sublime,  or  pathetic, 
than  natural  genius  could  have  given. 

U4.  Inspiration  of  suggestion,  where  the  use  of  the  faculties  is  superceded,  and 
God  does,  as  it  were,  speak  directly  to  the  mind,  making  such  discoveries  to  it 
as  it  could  not  otherwise  have  obtained,  and  dictating  the  very  words  in  which 
such  discoveries  are  to  be  communicated,  if  they  are  designed  as  a  message  to 
others."  » 

INSPIRED  TRANSLATION. 

Mr.  S.  next  undertakes  to  show  a  huge  error  in  the  promises  made 
in  the  "Book  of  Covenants  relative  to  the  Inspired  Translation.  He 
argues  that  the  promise,  "My  Scriptures  shall  be  given  as  I  have 
appointed,  and  they  shall  be  preserved  in  safety,"  means  that  all  the 
Scripture  ever  inspired  of  God  was  to  be  given  to  the  Church  in 
the  Inspired  Translation.  There  is  scarcely  any  occasion  to  reply 
to  so  stupid  a  statement.  The  promise  was:  "My  Scripture  shall 
be  given  as  I  have  appointed;"  and  then  comes  the  promise,  "And 
they  shall  be  preserved  in  safety;"  and  then  follows  the  advice:  j 

"And  it  is  expedient  that  thou  shouldst  hold  thy  peace  concerning  them,  and 
not  teach  them  until  ye  have  received  them  in  full." — D.  C.  42 : 15. 
„  That  is,  the  Church  was  not  to  teach  those  Scriptures  which  God 
had  "appointed,"  ordained,  or  decreed,  to  give  to  the  Church,  until 
they  had  those  "appointed"  Scriptures  "in  full."  It  remained  for 
the  Church  to  wait  and  see  what  Scriptures  God  had  "appointed" 
unto  them,  in  what  he  should  give  in  the  Inspired  Translation;  for 
it  was  the  Inspired  Translation  that  was  spoken  of. 

SPIRITUAL  CREATION. 

The  next  point  that  Mr.  S.  urges  against  the  Inspired  Transla- 
tion is,  in  that  it  says : 

"For  I,  the  Lord  God,  created  all  things  of  which  I  have>poken,  spiritually, 
before  they  were  naturally  upon  the  face  of  the  earth.  And  I,  the  Lord  God, 
had  created  aU  the  children  of  men,  and  not  yet  a  man  to  till  the  ground,  for  in 
heaven  created  I  them,  and  there  was  not  yet  flesh  upon  the'earth,  neither  io. 


42  The  Divine  Calling  of 

the  water,  neither  in  the  air;  but  I,  the  Lord  God,  spake,  and  there  went  up  a 
mist  from  the  earth,  and  watered  the  whole  face  of  the  ground.  And,  I  the  Lord 
God,  formed  man  from  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the 
breath  of  life;  and  man  became  a  living  soul;  the  first  flesh  upon  the  earth,  the 
first  man  also;  nevertheless,  all  things  were  before  created,  but  spiritually  were 
they  created  and  made,  according  to  my  word." — Gen'  2: 5-9. 

Here  is  the  full  text,  underlined  as  we  find  it  in  the  article  of 
Mr.  S.  He  then  quotes  Gen.  6:52: 

"And  he  called  upon  our  father  Adam,  by  his  own  voice,  saying/I  am  God; 
I  made  the  world,  and  men  before  they  were  in  the  flesh" 

Mr.  S.  thinks  [this  is  contradicted,  directly,  by  Paul,  1  Cor.  15  : 
41-49,  where  he  says: 

uThe  first  man  Adam,  was  made  a  living  soul;  the  last  Adam  was  made  a 
quickening  spirit.  Howbeit  that  which  was  natural  first,  and  not  that  which  is 
spiritual;  but  afterwards  that  which  is  spiritual;  the  first  man  is  of  the  earth 
earthy;  the  second  man  is  the  Lord  from  heaven.11 

Now,  when  the  Lord  says,  "I  made  the  world,  and  men  before 
they  were  in  the  flesh"  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  creation  of  man 
here  spoken  of,  is  not  the  one  alluded  to  by  Paul,  when  he  says, 
"The  first  man  is  of  the  earth,  earthy."  Paul  clearly  refers  to  the 
creation  of  the  earthly  tabernacle,  the  fleshly  body  of  man,  while 
Gen.  2  : 4,  5,  6,  9,  and  6  : 52,  as  clearly  relate  to  their  spiritual 
creation.  Mr.  S.  would  deny  that  the  spirits  of  all  intelligent  be- 
ings are,  in  any  sense,  pre-existent.  Here  is  the  main  issue  be- 
tween him  and  the  text  quoted  from  Genesis. 

Now  the  common  version,  with  all  the  other  versions  that  have 
fallen  under  our  notice,  teaches  that,  '-In  the  day  that  the  Lord  God 
made  the  earth  and  the  heavens,"  he  made  "every  plant  of  the  field 
before  it  icas  in  the  earth^  and  every  herb  of  the  field  before  it 
grew." — Gen.  2  : 4,  5.  Now,  inasmuch  as  the  Lord  did  so  much 
for  the  vegetable  world  in  its  pre-existent  state,  is  it  at  all  surpris- 
ing that  he  created  and  fashioned  man's  spirit  before  it  took  a  taber- 
nacle of  flesh,  and  even  before  there  was  any  kind  of  flesh,  either  in 
the  air,  or  in  the  water,  or  upon  the  earth  ?  We  think  not. 

There  are  a  great  many  texts  that  teach  the  pre-existence  of 
spirits,  a  doctrine  very  fatal  to  the  theories  so  fondly  entertained  by 
Mr.  S.  and  his  fellows.  The  Bible  proclaims  the  Lord  as  "the  God 
of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh."— Num.  16:22;  27:16.  And  Paul 
declares  him  to  be  "the  father  of  spirits." — Heb.  12  :  9. 

Now,  that  the  spirit  of  at  least  one  man  pre-existed,  is,  we  think 
quite  evident;  and  if  the  spirit  of  one  pre-existed,  pray  why  not 


Joseph  Smith  Defended. 


all?  The  law  governing  one  case  clearly  governs  all,  for  God  is  no 
respecter  of  persons.  Of  "the  man  Christ  Jesus/'  —  that  his  spirit, 
as  a  conscious,  active  entity,  did  exist  ages  before  he  took  an  earthly 
body,  a  fleshly  tabernacle  from  the  womb  of  Mary,  is  placed  beyond 
question  by  his  own  words,  and  by  the  words  of  prophets  and 
apostles.  Hear  him  : 

"I  came  forth  from  the  Father,  and  am  come  into  the  world  :  again,  I  leave- 
the  world,  and  go  to  the  Father."  —  John  16:  28. 

And  Jesus  commends  this  belief  in  his  pre-existence  as  an  im- 
portant element  in  the  true  faith,  for  he  says  : 

"For  the  Father  himself  loveth  you,  because  ye  have  loved  me,  and  have* 
believed  that  I  came  out  from  God."  —  Verse  27. 

Again  he  says: 

"And  now,  0  Father,  glorify  thou  me  with  thine  own  self,  with  the  glory 
which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was."  —  John  17:5. 

Again  :  — 

"The  bread  of  God  is  he  which  cometh  down  from  heaven,  and  giveth  life  to- 
the  world."—  John  6  :  33. 

John  testifies  of  him  : 

"In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word. 
was  God.  *  *  *  All  things  were  made  by  him.  *  *  *  And  the  Word  was 
made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us."  —  John  1:1,3,  14. 

Paul  says: 

"By  him  were  all  things  created,  that  are  in  heaven,  and  that  are  in  earth  v 
visible  and  invisible.1'—  Col.  1:  16. 

And  of  his  incarnation  Paul  says  : 

"When  he  [Christ]  cometh  into  the  world,  he  saith,  Sacrifice  and  offering 
thou  wouldst  not,  but  a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me."  —  Heb.  10:  5. 

This  "body"  was  evidently  "prepared"  of  God  in  the  womb  of 
the  virgin  Mary  ;  and  into  this  "body"  at  its  birth,  the  pre-existent,  in- 
telligent spirit  of  Christ  entered,  and  accomplished  the  work  assigned 
of  the  Father  for  the  redemption  of  man.  Now  Paul  draws  a  parallel 
between  Christ,  who  came  into  the  world  to  save  man,  and  man  whom 
he  came  to  save.  He  says: 

"Forasmuch  then  as  the  children  [whom  he  came  to  save]  are  partakers  of 
flesh  and  blood,  he  also  likewise  took  part  of  the  same;  that  through  death  he- 
might  destroy  him  that  had  the  power  of  death,  that  is,  the  devil."—  Heb.  3  :  14., 

When  he  says  that  "the  children  are  partakers  of  flesh  and  blood," 
he  says,  in  substance,  that  "the  children"  had  an  existence  before- 


44  The  Divine  Calling  of 

they  partook  of  "flesh  and  blood;"  and  especially  when  he  says  uhe 
also,  likewise  [in  like  manner]  took  part  of  the  same"  [flesh  and 
blood] ;  thus  putting  Christ  and  the  children  on  the  same  grounds. 
This  places  the  matter  beyond  refutation,  that  the  spirits  of  all  men, 
as  well  as  the  spirit  of  Christ  pre-existed. 

With  this  idea  in  the  mind,  we  can  easily  reconcile  and  under- 
stand many  passages  in  both  Testaments,  which  otherwise  would 
remain  profoundly  mysterious.  Such,  for  instance,  as  the  following : 

"Master,  who  did  sin,  this  man,  or  his  parents,  that  he  was  born  blind?" — 
John  9: 2. 

This  question  pre-supposes  a  conscious,  responsible  pre-existence; 
and  Christ's  disciples  thought,  no  doubt,  that  the  spirits  of  all  men  ex- 
isted in  a  state  intellectual  consciousness  and  moral  freedom,  similar 
to  that  of  "the  angels  which  kept  not  their  first  estate,"  mentioned 
by  Jude,  (verse  6),  and  "the  angels  that  sinned,"  mentioned  by 
Peter.  (2  Pet.  2:4),  and  the  devil,  who  "abode  not  in  the  truth," 
mentioned  by  our  Savior,  (John  8  : 44).  Again : — 

"Where  wast  thou  when  I  laid  the  foundations  of  the  earth?  Declare  if  thou 
hast  understanding.  *  *  *  "When  the  morning  stars  sang  together,  and  all  the 
sons  of  G-od  shouted  for  joy." — Job  38: 4,  7. 

Christ  was  one  of  the  morning  stars,  (Rev.  22:16),  and  is  it  im- 
probable that  those  who  are  ministers  of  God  with  him  were  also 
morning  stars?  As  for  "the  sons  of  God,"  Jesus  was  one,  and  Adam 
was  another. — Luke  3  : 38.  This  being  the  case,  it  is  conclusive 
that  Adam's  children,  too,  those  whom  Christ  came  to  save  and 
bless,  were  likewise,  in  their  pre-existent  state,  "sons  of  God."  Paul 
said  to  the  Athenians,  "We  are  also  his  offspring." — Acts  17  :  28. 
The  sons  of  God  could  have  "shouted  for  joy"  at  the  founding  of 
our  earth  only  in  a  pre-existent  state.  So  much  for  the  pre-exist- 
ence of  the  spirit  of  man;  and  yet  but  a  small  amount  of  the  avail- 
able proof  has  been  adduced. 

As  to  the  pre-existence  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh,  one  thing  we 
think  is  clear,  and  that  is  that  the  law  of  existence  that  appertains 
to  one  class  of  spirits  appertains  to  all.  There  certainly  is  nothing 
in  the  Scriptures  nor  in  philosophy  against  this  idea,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  very  much  to  favor  it.  Of  the  condition  of  spirits  in  their 
pre-existent  state  but  little,  comparatively,  is  said.  However,  the 
doctrine  of  pre-existence  is  much  more  ancient  than  apostolic  times, 
and  it  was  extensively  taught  in  the  first  centuries  of  the  Christian 
era,  as  may  be  seen  by  consulting  the  early  Christian  Fathers.  We 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  45 

have  seen  on  page  nineteen,  that  Eusebius  held  to  the  pre-exist- 
ence  of  Christ.     To  this  we  refer  the  reader. 

Mr.  S.  attempts  to  make  the  Inspired  Translation  contradict  itself 
in  regard  to  the  creation,  by  confounding  the  two  creations,  spiritual 
and  physical,  in  one.  This  is  a  genuine  Infidel  trick,  and  Mr.  S. 
probably  borrowed  it  frem  that  class  of  critics.  The  first  chapter 
in  the  Inspired  Translation  embraces  an  epitomized  statement  of  the 
creation,  while  the  chapters  following  contain  a  recapitulation,  and 
more  detailed  account.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  the  common  ver- 
sion. Reading  the  account  of  the  creation  with  .this  view  in  the 
mind,  as  one  evidently  should  do,  there  is  then  not  the  least  appear- 
ance of  contradiction.  Here  is  a  passage  he  uses  with  evident  satis- 
faction  to  prove  a  conflict: 

"And  I,  the  Lord  God,  had  created  all  the  children  of  men,  and,  not  yet  a 
man  to  till  the  ground." — Gen.  2 : 6. 

And  then  opposes  to  it  the  following: 

uLet  us  make  man  in  our  own  image." — Gen.  1:27.' 

Now  Mr.  S.  knew  when  he  wrote  the  statement,  that  the  quotation 
from  Gen.  2  :  6:,  was  qualified  and  explained  by  its  contexts,  so  as  to 
make  rt  relate  to  the  creation  of  spirits,  or  the  spiritual  ereation, 
for  they  read: 

'Tor  I,  the  Lord  God,  created  all  things  of  which  I  have  spoken,  spiritually, 
before  they  were  naturally  upon  the  face  of  the  earth.  *  *  *  And  I,  the  Lord 
God,  had  created  all  the  children  of  men,  and  not  yet  [at  the  time  when  he 
created  the  spirits]  a  man  to  till  the  ground,  for  in  heaven  created  I  them,  and 
there  was  not  yet  [at  the  time  the  spirits  were  created]  flesh  upon  the  earth, 
neither  in  the  water,  neither  in  the  air." — Gen.  2:5,  6. 

Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  these  texts  relate  to  the  creation 
of  pre-existent  spirits  before  there  was  any  kind  of  flesh  on  the 
earth.  At  the  eighth  verse  of  the  same  chapter  begins  the  account 
of  man's  physical  creation: 

"And  I,  the  Lord  God,  formed  man  from  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and  breathed 
into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life ;  and  man  became  a  living  soul ;  the  first  flesh 
upon  the  earth,  the  first  man  also." 

That  this  relates  to  man's  physical  creation  is  further  apparent 
from  what  follows  in  the  next  verse : 

"Nevertheless,  all  tilings  were  before  created,  but  spiritually'were  they  cre- 
ated and  made  according  to  my  word." — Yerse  9.J 

Mr.  S.  then  charges  that  there  is  a  conflict  between,  the  account 
(in.  chapter  1  :  22-26)  of  the  creation  of  the  lower  orders  of  animal 


46  The  Divine  Calling  of 

life,  and  the  account  of  the  creation  of  man  which  follows,  (in  verses 
27-30),  and  the  statement  in  chapter  2:8,  where  it  says  that  man 
^ras  the  first  flesh  "upon  the  earth,"  as  though  it  was  a  question 
only  and  merely  of  time,  whereas,  it  is  clearly  one  of  rank,  position, 
and  dignity.  Man  was  the  "first  flesh  upon  the  earth,"  from  the 
fact  that  God  placed  them  in  the  first  rank  in  dominion,  and  made 
them  first  in  physical  excellence,  and  gave  them  dominion  over  all 
the  earth,  and  over  every  living  thing. — Gen.  1  :  28-31. 

JOSEPH,  HIS  TWO  FATHERS. 

Hr.  S.  next  avers  that 

"Joseph's  inspired  version  clashes  with  itself  and  with  reason,  by  giving  two 
natural  fathers  to  Joseph,  the  husband  of  Mary,  *  *  *  in  rendering  Matt.  1 : 4, 
4  Jacob  begat  Joseph,'  and  in  translating  Luke  3 : 30,  Joseph  Vas  from  the  loina 
of  Heli.'  Certainly  he  could  not  have  been  begotten  by  Jacob,  and  also  come 
from  the  loins  of  Heli." 

We  think  that  he  could,  Mr.  S.,  just  as  well  as  that  Jesus  could 
come  of  the  "loins"  of  David,  and  at  the  same  time  be  begotten  by 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Peter,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  under  the 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  declared^  that  God  had  sworn  unto 
David 

"That  of  the  fruit  of  his  loins,  according  to  the  flesh,  he  would  raise  up  Christ 
to  sit  on  his  throne."— Acts  2: 30. 

Now,  Joseph  was  only  the  putative  father  of  Jesus,  and  in  this 
manner  did  Jesus  descend  from  the  loins  of  David.  It  was  a  cus- 
tom of  the  ancient  Hebrews,  (Gen.  38  :  8),  and  a  laic  under  the 
Mosaic  polity,  for  a  man  to  marry  his  brother's  widow  and  raise  up 
seed  unto  his  brother.  And  it  was  especially  provided 

"That  the  firstborn  which  she  beareth  shall  succeed  in  the  name  of  his  broth- 
er which  is  dead,  that  his  name  be  not  put  out  of  Israel." — Deut.  25:  6. 

Now  Joseph,  the  husband  of  Mary,  was  the  natural  son  of  Jacob, 
but,  under  the  law  we  have  cited,  he  was  reckoned  from  "the  loins" 
of  Heli ;  for  Joseph's  mother  was  first  married  to  Heli,  and,  as  he 
died  without  seed,  Jacob  took  her  to  wife  and  their  first  born  was 
Joseph,  who  by  the  lav:  was  reckoned  as  Heli's  son,  and  as  being 
"from  the  loins  of  Heli."  It  will  be  seen  on  comparing  Matt.  1  : 
15  with  Luke  3  :  23,  24,  that  Matthan  (Matthat,  Greek)  was  the 
father  of  both  Jacob  and  Heli,  and  that  Heli  was  not  the  father  of 
Mary,  as  Mr.  S.  asserts;  for  the  lineage  is  reckoned  in  the  male  line 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  47 

and  not  in  the  female,  as  claimed  by  Mr.  S.     Of  this  matter  Euse- 
bius,  a  competent  authority,  says: 

"Thus,  then,  wo  shall  find  the  two  [Jacob  and  Heli]  of  different  families, 
[Jacob,  through  Matthan,  his  natural  father,  is  of  the  family  of  Solomon;  while 
Heli,  his  brother,  had  the  same  mother,  his  father  under  the  law  being  Matthan, 
while  his  natural  father  was  Melchi,  who  was  of  the  family  of  Nathan],  Jacob 
and  Heli,  brothers  by  the  same  mother.  Of  these,  the  one,  Jacob,  on  the  death 
of  his  brother,  marrying  his  widow,  became  the  father  of  a  third,  viz.,  Joseph; 
his  son  both  by  nature  and  calculation.  Wherefore  it  is  written,  Jacob  begat 
Joseph.  But  according  to  the  law  he  was  the  son  of  Heli;  for  Jacob  being  his 
brother  raised  up  seed  to  him.  "Wherefore,  the  genealogy  graced  also  through 
him,  will  not  be  rendered  void." — Eccl.  Hist.  33. 

The  Son  of  God  was  "made  of  a  woman,  made  under  the  law," 
(Gal.  4:4);  yet  his  genealogy,  as  provided  for  by  the  law,  and  as 
we  have  seen  in  the  history  of  the  case,  is  traced  in  the  male  line, 
through  his  supposed  father,  back  through  "the  loins  of  David;"  so, 
under  that  same  law,  and  according  to  the  same  custom,  is  Joseph 
reckoned  "of  the  loins  of  Heli.  Mr.  S.  has  the  same  grounds  for 
saying  that  Peter's  statement  makes  David  the  natural  progenitor 
of  Jesus,  that  he  has  for  saying  that  Joseph  Smith's  translation 
makes  Heli  the  natural  father  of  Joseph.  The  cases  are  parallel. 
Jesus  was  not  the  natural  son  of  David,  though  he  was  reckoned, 
under  the  law  governing  genealogies,  as  proceeding  from  his  "loins;" 
and  Joseph  was  not  the  natural  son  of  Heli,  yet  under  the  law  he 
was  reckoned  as  descending  from  his  "loins." 

BAPTISM. 

Mr.  S.  next  finds  fault  with  the  Inspired  Translation  because  it 
introduces  baptism  in  the  days  of  Adam.  It  is  not  so  much  with 
the  fact  of  baptism  as  it  is  for  using  the  term  baptism,  which  he 
tells  us  is  "a  Greek  word  with  an  English  termination."  Baptism 
is  not  a  Greek  word.  It  is  purely  an  English  word,  though  derived 
from  the  Greek,  as  are  thousands  of  other  English  words.  Baptism 
is  the  name  of  a  religious  ceremony;  and,  so  far  as  its  mode  is  con- 
cerned, is  performed  by  immersion.  Immersion  is  not  always  bap- 
tism; for  a  person  may  be  immersed  in  a  variety  of  ways,  as  by  ac- 
cident, or  force,  without  the  least  reference  to  religion.  Now,  in 
translating  a  word  from  the  original  that  signified  the  religious  cer- 
emony of  baptism,  why  not  call  it  baptism  as  Mr.  Smith  has  done? 
The  duty  of  a  translator  is  to  transfer  the  sense  and  import  of  words 
found  in  one  language  into  words  having  the  same  sense  and  import 
in  another  language.  This  Mr.  Smith  has  done. 


48  The  Divine  Calling  of 

Mr.  S.  next  says : 

"If  Adam's  baptism,  as  recorded  by  Joseph,  was  a  true  pattern,  all  subse- 
quent baptisms  are  faulty :  'Adam  cried  unto  the  Lord,  and  he  was  caught 
away  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord,  and  was  carried  down  into  the  water,  and  was 
laid  under  the  water,  and  was  brought  forth  out  of  the  water;  and  thus  he  was 
baptized.' — (Gen.  6:67).  Why,  [says  Mr.  S.]  was  not  baptism  subsequently 
administered  on  the  same  principle,  if  this  was  really  God's  work?" 

Simply,  we  reply,  because  there  was  no  occasion  for  it,  God  hav- 
ing, after  the  baptism  of  Adam,  provided  suitable  administrators. 
Will  Mr.  S.  deny  that  God  may,  and  often  does,  accomplish  the 
same  ends  in  different  ways?  God  bestowed  the  Holy  Gho&t 
"through  laying  oa  of  the  apostles  hands"  in  "the  city  of  Samaria/' 
(Acts  8  : 18),  and  then  bestowed  it  upon  Cornelius  and  his-  house- 
hold while  they  were  listening  to  the  discourse  of  Peter,  (Acts  10  : 
44).  Christ's  ministry  usually  traveled  as  men  generally  do,  when 
they  went  forth  to  preach,  yet  we  read  of  an  extraordinary  case  of 
journeying  wherein  the  Lord  stepped  out  of  his  usual  way  of  doing 
things : 

"The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  caught  away  Philip,  that  the  eunuch  saw  him  no 
more;  and  he  went  on  his  way  rejoicing.  But  Phi-lip  was  found  at  Azotus." — 
Acts  8:39,40. 

A  crafty  critic  might  claim  that  Philip's  ease  was  "a  pattern," 
and  urge  that  all  Christ's  ministers,  in  all  ages,  should  be 
"caught  away"  by  the  Spirit,  as-  Philip  was;  and  then  we  would 
be  equally  as  reasonable  as  Mr.  S.  There  are  ordinary  methods 
for  caring  the  sick,  for  making  bread,  for  raising  fish,  for  making 
oil,  for  feeding  the  hungry,  and  for  making  wine,  yet  tnis  does 
not  preclude  the  Lord's  accomplishing  the  same  things  in  an 
unusual  manner.  And  when  the  Lord,  in  an  extraordinary  way, 
performs  any  work,  professed  Bible  believers  are  scarcely  justified 
in  assuming  that  as  "a  pattern"  for  all  coming  time. 

BAPTISM,  OF  ANCIENT  DATE. 

As  for  baptism  being  a  very  ancient  rite,  there  is  much  evidence 
to  prove  it.  Baptism  was  clearly  no  new  thing  to  the  Jews,  for 
when  John  came  preaching  "the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins,"  "all  the  land  of  Judea,  and  they  of  Jerusalem," 
responded  to  the  call,  (Mark  1  :  4,  5);  which  they  would  not  have 
done  if  that  distinguishing  ordinance  had  been  new  and  strange  to 
them,  either  in  fact,  or  in  the  mode  of  its  administration.  Again, 
the  question  addressed  by  the  Priests  and  Levites  to  John :  "Why 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  49 

baptizest  thou  then,  if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias,  neither  that 
Prophet?'  (Jno.  1:25),  is  conclusive  that  they  understood  well 
concerning  baptism,  and  that  the  ministration  of 'Christ,  Elias,  and 
"that  Prophet,"  in  the  looked  fir  dispensation,  would  be  eminently 
distinguished  by  that  ordinance.  Anciently,  when  a  Gentile  was  con- 
verted to  the  Hebrew  faith,  he  was  baptized.  Baptism  was  prac- 
ticed to  a  great  extent  among  the  Pagan  nations  of  the  East,  both 
before  and  since  the  Christian  era.  Whence  did  this  ancient  prac- 
tice, whether  among  Hebrews  or  Pagan  nations,  originate?  Evi- 
dently from  the  religious  ceremony  of  baptism  given  of  God  to  bis 
people  in  the  beginning. 

The  idea  of  the  One  God;  of  the  virgin-born  Redeemer:  paradise ; 
the  fall  of  man;  the  temptation  through  the  serpent;  the  cross  and 
its  wondrous  saving  power;  sacrificial  offerings,  and  the  atonement 
for  sin;  the  incarnation  of  the  Creator;  the  crucifixion;  the  resur- 
rection; the  pre-existence  and  immortality  of  man's  spirit;  the 
reign  of  the  Holy  One  in  peace  and  glory;  preaching  to  the  spirits 
in  prison;  the  New  Jerusalem;  the  renewal  of  the  earth,  and  the 
final  restitution,  etc  ,  etc  , — ideas  held  in  part  or  in  whole  by  many 
of  the  ancient  Pagan  nations  of  the  East,  as  also  in  part  by  the 
ancient  Peruvians  and  Mexicans — are  all  referable  to  the  one 
source,  viz.,  an  early  revelation  given  to  God's  people ;  of  which 
these  ideas,  corrupted  though  they  be,  are  the  remaining  traditions, 
brought  down  from  Adam  and  the  antediluvian  patriarchs  to  Noah; 
and  from  Noah,  through  his  posterity,  to  the  Tower;  and  from  the 
Tower,  at  the  confounding  of  languages,  they  were  borne  out  with 
the  various  streams  of  emigration  to  all  the  different  parts  of  the 
world. 

These  traditions  and  practices  bear  the  unmistakable  impress  of 
those  -grand  truths  that  distinguish  original  Christianity,  as  taught 
by  the  prophets,  and  by  Christ  and  his  apostles;  and  which,  as 
taught  in  the  Inspired  Translation,  the  Book  of  Mormon,  and  the 
Book  of  Doctrine  and  Covenants,  were  revealed  of  God  to  the  first 
patriarchs  and  prophets,  from  Adam  to  Noah,  and  from  Noah  to 
Moses. 

As  the  limpid  and  refreshing  streams  of  the  mountains,  springing 
from  the  bosom  of  eternal  snow,  go  down  and  are  defiled  and  dark- 
ened by  mingling  with  the  turbid  river  of  the  valleys,  sweeping  on, 
and  on.  to  the  great  sea,  so  these  wondrous,  heaven-born  truths, 
given  to  man  in  the  morn  of  time,  and  coming  down  through  the 


50  The  Divine  Calling  of 

ages,  have  become  obscured  and  polluted  as  they  have  been  mingled 
with  the  corrupting  systems  and  creeds  of  men,  till,  at  length,  but 
a  dim  shadow,  a  faint  likeness,  of  their  former  character  and  excel- 
lence remains. 


CHAPTER  III. 

Mr.  S.  next  attacks  Joseph's  account  of  the  baptism  of  0.  Cow- 
dery  and  himself,  after  their  first  ordination  by  the  angel;  also  the 
statement  of  the  angel  concerning  < 'baptism  by  immersion  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins." 

BAPTISM,  ITS  MODE. 

"If  baptism  is  immersion,  [says  Mr.  S.],  then  this  angel  really  talks  about 
immersion  by  immersion.  *  *  Such  an  angel  ought  to  go  to  school  before 
discoursing  on  baptism.'1 

Baptism,  as  a  Christian  rite,  a  religious  ceremony,  (and  that  is 
what  the  angel  was  talking  about),  is  more  than  mere  immersion, 
as  we  have  said  before.  Baptism,  as  that  term  has  been  used  in  the 
true  Christian  Church,  is  a  religious  ordinance,  and  is  designed  both 
for  the  remission  of  sins  and  as  a  means  of  initiation  into  the  fold 
and  Church  of  Christ — the  family  of  God.  To  this  agree  both  the 
Scriptures  and  the  primitive  church  history.  Now,  it  was  eminently 
proper  that  the  angel  should  explain  both  the  object  of  baptism,  and 
the  mode  of  administering  the  rite,  especially  when  we  consider  that 
Joseph  and  Oliver  had  been  reared  in  the  midst  of  a  people  who 
held  that  baptism  by  sprinkling  or  pouring  was  valid.  The  angel, 
like  a  true  minister  for  Christ,  addressed  himself  to  the  manifest 
wants  of  the  case,  speaking  to  the  understanding  of  the  young  men, 
and  making  his  instruction  plain  to  their  comprehension  and  con- 
clusive to  their  judgment.  If  his  manner  had  been  mysterious,  and 
his  instructions  ambiguous,  then  there  would  have  been  good  ground 
for  questioning  his  mission.  A  true  teacher,  whether  angel  or 
otherwise,  will  suit  his  instruction  to  the  needs,  and  to  the  under- 
standing of  those  whom  he  addresses. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  51 

BAPTISM  FOR  REMISSION  OF  SINS. 

Mr.  S.  next  objects : 

"If  baptism  is  'for  the  remission  of  sins,'  in  the  Mormon  sense  of  the  state- 
ment, instead  of  the  Bible  sense,  why  need  Joseph  have  been  baptized,  seeing 
that  his  sins  previously  had  been  forgiven  him?" 

On  similar  grounds,  Mr.  S.,  that  Cornelius  and  his  household, 
whom  "God  hath  cleansed,"  (Acts  10  :  15),  needed  to  be  baptized. 
Peter  said : 

"Forasmuch  as  God  gave  them  the  like  gift  as  he  did  unto  us,  who  believed 
on.  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  what  was  I,  that  I  could  withstand  God?11 — Acts 
11:  17. 

"Can  any  man  forbid  water  that  these  should  not  be  baptized,  which  have 
received  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we?  And  he  commanded  them  to  be  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  the  Lord,11— Acts  10:  47,  48. 

This  case  is  directly  in  point,  as  showing  that  the  Lord  may  for- 
give an  unbaptized  person  their  sins,  under  extraordinary  circum- 
stances, and  yet  the  person  be  a  proper  subject  for  future  baptism. 
Mr.  S.  further  says : 

"Here  was  a  divinely  inspired  man  engaged  in  translating  ancient  records, 
and  still  a  sinner,  not  having  been  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  which 
Implies,  according  to  Mormon  interpretation,  the  forgiveness  of  sins.11 

Mr.  Smith,  like  Cornelius  and  his  household,  whose  case  we  have 
just  cited,  had  been  graciously  "cleansed,"  or  forgiven  his  sins,  as 
Joseph's  record  states;  and  for  the  matter  of  God's  using  him  as  an 
instrument  to  do  his  work,  and  to  promote  his  glory  without  previous 
baptism,  there  is  nothing  either  unreasonable  or  unscriptural  in  it. 
Caiaphas,  the  Jewish  high  priest,  who  was  neither  a  Christian  nor 
friendly  to  the  gospel,  was  moved  of  God  to  prophesy  concerning  the 
death  and  mission  of  Christ,  (Jno.  11  : 49-52);  Balaam  was  used 
of  God  as  an  instrument  through  whom  to  foretell  the  future  history 
of  Israel,  and  the  coming  of  Christ,  (Num.  chapters  22,  23,  24); 
Pharaoh,  (Gen.  41  :  1);  Abimelech,  (Gen.  20  :  3-7);  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, (Dan.  2);  and  others  not  identified  with  God's  people,  were 
used  of  God  in  revealing  his  marvelous  purposes  and  doings  to  man. 
So  also  Joseph  us,  the  Jewish  general  and  historian,  (Wars,  B.  3, 
ch.  8,  sec.  9).  With  these  precedents  before  us,  it  is  not  at  all 
strange  to  Bible  believers  that  the  Lord  should  call  and  use  Joseph 
in  the  divine  work  of  either  prophesying,  baptizing,  ordaining,  or 
translating  records,  prior  to  his  baptism,  in  laying  the  foundation  of 
the  Latter  Day  Work. 


52  The  Divine  Calling  of 

ORDINATION  OF  JOSEPH  AND  OLIVER. 

Mr.  S.  professes  to  see  something  very  unreasonable  in  Joseph 
and  Oliver  mutually  ordaining  each  other  after  having  been  ordained 
by  the  angel.  He  says  the  angel  "virtually  repudiates  his  own  act 
of  ordination  by  commanding  them  to  ordain  each  other."  We  are 
not  aware  of  there  being  any  Bible  precedent  by  which  to  prove  the 
scripturalness  of  this  procedure,  yet  there  is  an  act  of  our  Savior  in 
which  the  same  principle  is  involved: 

"And,  behold,  there  came  a  leper  and  worshipped  him,  saying,  Lord,  if  thou 
wilt,  thou  canst  make  me  clean.  And  Jesus  put  forth  his  hand,  and  touched 
him,  saying,  I  will;  be  thou  clean.  And  immediately  his  leprosy  was  cleansed. 
And  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  See  thou  tell  no  man;  but  go  thy  way,  show  thyself 
to  the  priest,  and  offer  the  gift  that  Moses  commanded,  for  a  testimony  unta 
them."— Matt.  8:  2-4. 

Jesus  did  not  "repudiate  his  own  act/'  by  commanding  the  leper 
to  comply  with  the  law  provided  for  cleansing  leprosy,  (Lev.  13 
3-10);  nor  did  the  angel  repudiate  Ms  own  act  of  ordination  by 
commanding  Joseph  and  Oliver  to  comply  with  the  law  governing 
ordinations.  The  command  was  highly  proper,  and  in  perfect  har- 
mony with  the  teachings  and  doings  of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  who 
always  paid  respect  to  the  law  and  order  of  God.  Though  the  leper 
was  "immediately"  cleansed  by  Jesus,  yet  he  was  commanded  to 
"offer  the  gift  that  Moses  had  commanded,  for  a  testimony  unto 
them"  (meaning,  evidently,  the  priest  and  the  people  who  chanced 
to  know  his  leprosy) ;  so  Joseph  and  Oliver,  though  ordained  by  the 
angel,  yet  were  commanded  to  ordain  each  other,  upon  vote  of 
the  Saints,  "for  a  testimony  to  them,"  and  to  all  interested,  and  in 
respect  to  the  law  and  order  of  God. 

SONS  OF  LEVI. 

Again  Mr.  S.  objects,  that 

"This  same  angel  intimates  that  the  sons  of  Levi  are  again  to  offer  an  offer- 
ing unto  the  Lord,  which  would  be  a  repudiation  of  Christ,  the  great  anti-typical 
sacrifice,  by  again  introducing  the  shadow." 

Their  making  in  the  future  an  offering  unto  the  Lord  would  be 
no  more  a  repudiation  of -Christ,  than  Christ's  eating  the  passover, 
in  the  future,  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  (Luke  22  :  16),  would  be  a 
repudiation  of  Christ  himself.  It  is  not  improbable  that  in  the 
world  to  come,  when  Christ  reigns  as  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of 
lords,  many  ceremonies  will  be  performed,  not  as  types  pointing  to 
the  future,  but  as  memorials  commemorative  of  the  past,  such  as  the 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  53 

passover  once  was,  and  such  as  the  sacrament  now  is.  On  this 
hypothesis  we  can  explain  and  reconcile  the  prophetic  visions  of 
Ezekiel,  chapters  40  to  48:  Zech.  14  : 16-21;  Isa.  66  :  21-23,  etc. 
Ceremonies  may  be,  and  sometimes  are,  both  typical  and  commem- 
orative at  the  same  time.  Such  was  the  passover.  It  pointed  back 
to  that  terrible  night  in  Egypt  when  the  Lord  destroyed  Egypt's 
first-born  and  passed  over  faithful  Israel,  and  also  pointed  forward 
to  the  Lord  Jesus,  "our  passover"  lamb. 

God  has  promised  by  Isaiah,  that,  in  the  final  gathering  of  Israel 
from  all  lands,  and  from  the  "isles  of  the  sea,"  (Isa.  66  : 19,  20),  he 
will  "take  of  them  for  priests  and  Levites."  He  has  also  prom- 
ised that 

"He  shall  purify  the  sons  of  Levi,  and  purge  them  as  gold  and  silver,  that 
they  may  offer  unto  the  Lord  an  offering  in  righteousness.  Then  shall  the  offer- 
ing of  Judah  and  Jerusalem  be  pleasant  unto  the  Lord,  as  in  the  days  of  old, 
and  as  in  former  years." — Mai.  3:3,4. 

It  would  not  be  an  easy  task  to  prove  that  these  promises  were 
conditional,  or  that  they  have  been  already  fulfilled,  yet  some  will 
even  undertake  to  do  one,  or  both.  The  texts,  with  their  contexts, 
show  that  they  are  not  conditional ;  and  further,  that  they  remain 
to  be  fulfilled  in  the  future.] 

JOHN,  A  PRIEST.  ' 

^Mr.  S.  says: 

!^"There  is  no  proof  that  John  was  ever  ordained  a  priest.  This  point  needs 
proof— not  conjecture.  If  he  was  not  an  officiating  priest,  how  could  he  hold 
the  keys  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood?" 

John  was  the  only  son  of  an  officiating  priest,  (Luke  1  : 5),  and 
had  a  right  to  the  priesthood  of  his  father, — (Lev.  7  :  35,  36;  Mai. 
2  :  5).  Of  the  chief  and  most  important  duties  of  a  priest,  the  Lord 
says  by  Malachi,  chapter  2:6,  7 : 

"The  law  of  truth  was  in  his  mouth,  and  iniquity  "was  not  found  in  his  lips; 
he  walked  with  me  in  peace  and  equity,  and  did  turn  many  away  from  iniquity. 
For  the  priest's  lips  should  keep  knowledge,  and  they  should  seek  the  law  at 
his  mouth;  for  he  is  tlie  messenger  of  the  Lord  of  hosts" 

John  filled  this  description  of  a  priest  in  a  very  eminent  degree. 
And  Jesus  testifies  of  him : 

"This  is  he  of  whom  it  is  written,  Behold  I  send  my  messenger  before  thy  face, 
who  shall  prepare  thy  way  before  thee." — Matt.  11:  10. 

Besides  this,  while  the  Jews  questioned  the  authority  of  Jesus, 
they  never  questioned  the  priesthood  authority  of  John,  which 


54  The  Divine  Calling  of 

they  evidently  would  have  done  if  they  had  known  that  he  did  not 
hold  the  priesthood.  The  masses  recognized  his  priestly  authority 
to  teach  and  reprove  them,  as  maybe  seen  in  the  fact  that  "all  Judea 
and  Jerusalem"  answered  to  his  call,  and  were  baptized  of  him  ID 
the  river  Jordan. — (Mark  1).  The  mere  fact  of  the  ordination  of 
Zacharias,  or  Caiaphas,  or  Annas,  as  well  as  John  is  not  mentioned 
in  Scripture,  but  it  would  be  folly  to  deny  their  ordination  simply 
because  the  Scriptures  are  silent  upon  that  point.  Such  reasoning, 
which  is  quite  common  to  Mr.  S.,  would  deny  that  the  apostles  of 
Christ  were  baptized,  simply  because  no  mention  is  made,  in  direct 
terms,  of  that  fact.  The  Jews,  as  well  as  all  the  Israel  of  God,  well 
knew  that  no  person  could  minister  in  matters  of  religion  without 
proper  priesthood  authority.  They,  as  well  as  Pagan  worshippers, 
had  too  much  sound,  practical  sense  to  accept  the  religious  ministra- 
tions of  any  person  unless  they  were  satisfied  that  they  held  proper^ 
lawful  authority. 

MORE  TRUTH  THAN  FOUND  IN  THE  BIBLE. 

The  reader  will  have  noticed  ere  this,  that  Mr.  S.  argues  upon 
the  assumption  that  all  questions  relative  to  matters  of  religion  must 
be  settled  by  direct  proofs  from  the  Bible.  Direct  evidence  from 
that  source  is  very  excellent,  but  there  are  many  superior  proofs 
that  can  only  be  inferred;  and  there  are  thousands  of  valid  proofs 
in  matters  of  religion  outside  of  the  Bible.  To  claim  that  all  the 
facts  and  proofs  peculiar  to  the  Christian  religion  are  embraced 
within  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  is  preposterous.  If  we  had  all 
the  teachings  of  Jesus,  and  all  the  teachings  of  his  apostles,  and  all 
the  writings  of  the  prophets,  yet  that,  great  as  it  would  be,  would 
not  compass  all  that  relates  to  matters  of  religion  in  Christ  Jesus. 
The  apostles  had  the  "law  and  the  prophets."  And,  without  doubt, 
they  had  many  more  sacred  writings  than  what  we  now  have  in  the 
Old  Testament,  for  both  the  Savior  and  the  apostles  quote  script- 
ures not  found  in  the  common  version;  and  besides  this,  many 
quotations  are  made  by  Josephus,  professedly  from  the  old  prophets, 
which  are  not  now  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament,  as  may  be 
seen  by  consulting  Whist&n's  Josephus,  pp.  38,  66,  67,  126,  277, 
etc.,  etc.  They  had  also  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  the  thousandth 
part  of  which  we  probably  have  not,  (Jno.  21  : 25);  and  then  they 
had  the  constant  revelations  of  the  Comforter,  (Jno.  14  :  26;  16  : 


Joseph  Smith.  Defended.  55 

13,  14,  15).     Now,  if  we  had  all  this,  still  we  would  riot  be  justi- 
fied in  claiming  that  we  had  all  the  truths  of  God. 

If  we  had  the  books  of  all  the  ancient  prophets  and  seers  men- 
tioned in  the  Bible,  some  twenty  or  more  in  number;  also  all  the 
writings  of  the  early  Christian  Church  for  the  first  three  centuries, 
especially  the  first  epistle  which  Paul  wrote  to  the  Corinthians, 
(1  Cor.  5  :  9);  likewise  "the  epistle  from  Laodicea,"  (Col.  4  :  16); 
the  epistle  of  Jude  on  the  common  salvation,  (Jude  4);  and  the 
"many"  gospels  mentioned  by  Luke,  (Luke  1  :  1),  we,  no  doubt, 
would  be  furnished  with  evidences  on  doctrine  and  history  which 
would  be  of  use  in  solving  questions  of  importance  in  respect  to  the 
Christian  religion.  The  idea  that  nothing  relative  to  doctrine,  cer- 
emony, or  practice,  in  church  affairs  can  be  true  except  there  can 
be  found  for  it  in  the  Bible  a  direct  verbal  proof,  or  an  unquestion- 
able precedent,  is  highly  absurd.  If  the  early  Christians  had  been 
subjected  to  such  an  iron  rule  the  gospel  would  have  been  fettered, 
and  the  Church  manacled.  All  the  truths  of  Christ's  religion  are 
harmonious.  There  must  be  no  conflict,  no  contradiction,  no  con- 
fusion ;  and  there  is  none  in  the  revelations  of  the  past  or  the  pres- 
ent, and  surely  there  will  be  none  in  the  future. 

PRIESTHOOD. 

Now,  in  respect  to  the  subject  of  the  priesthood,  Mr.  S.  seems 
painfully  sensitive.  It  would  seem  that  he  cannot  say  enough 
against  the  idea  that  there  is  an  authorized  priesthood  in  the  Church 
of  Christ.  He  attacks  it  again  and  again,  conscious  that  if  the  idea 
proves  true,  his  labors  in  the  ministry,  and  that  of  many  others, 
would  be  found  of  no  authority  in  Christ,  and  of  no  gospel  power  or 
value.  God  is  Judge  of  all,  and  we  will  have  no  controversy  as  to 
whether  Mr.  S.  holds  authority  from  Christ  or  not;  but  we  shall 
attempt  to  prove  that  there  is  in  the  Church  of  Christ  an  authorized, 
ordained  priesthood,  whatever  may  be  the  conclusions  of  Mr.  S.  and 
his  fellows. 

NECESSITY  FOR  PRIESTHOOD. 

That  any  religious  system  could  exist  without  an  authorized 
priesthood  to  teach  its  doctrines,  administer  its  rites,  govern  its 
membership,  and  have  the  lawful  and  special  watch-care  of  all  its 
interests,  is  an  idea  quite  foreign  to  all  ancient  forms,  whether 
Christian,  Jewish,  or  Pagan.  The  ancient  Jewish  religion,  author- 
ized of  God,  was  of  far  less  importance  and  value  than  the  religion 


56  The  Divine  Calling  of 

of  Christ,  and  yet  it  was  of  so  much  importance  in  the  sight  of  God 
that  none  were  permitted  to  minister  the  laws  and  ceremonies  ap- 
pertaining to  it  but  those  who  were  legally  and  properly  called  to 
those  sacred  offices.  There  was  authoritative  power  given  to  those 
ministers,  and  the  power  and  grace  of  God  attended  their  faithful 
ministrations.  There  was  also  a  specific  order  provided  by  which 
ministerial  authority  was  both  delegated  and  transmitted,  so  that 
there  need  be  no  mistake  in  regard  to  the  matter  of  priesthood 
authority.  This  was  eminently  wise  and  just,  as  order  and  good 
government  are  indispensibly  essential.  Inasmuch,  then,  as  the 
religion  of  Christ,  and  the  Church  of  Christ,  are  of  far  greater  im- 
portance, for  time  and  eternity,  than  that  of  the  Jews,  why  is  it  not 
at  least  equally  important,  to  have  an  authorized  priesthood,  and  well 
defined  rules  in  regard  to  delegating  and  transmuting  authority  in 
the  Church  of  Chr 

But  some  will  say.  i;  Where  are  those  rules?  we  do  not  discover 
them  in  the  New  Testament."  Very  true,  we  do  not  discover  them 
there  in  their  completeness,  and  there  is  good  reason  for  it.  The 
New  Testament  contains  but  a  portion  of  the  writings  given  to  the 
primitive  Church.  When  we  consider  how  the  early  Christians 
were  persecuted  and  driven  from  place  to  place  by  Jew  and  Gentile, 
we  may  wonder  only  that  so  much  has  been  preserved  to  us.  Bing- 
ham,  in  his  Antiquities  of  the  Christian  Church,  when  speaking  of 
the  writings  of  the  primitive  church,  s 

"An  exact  and  authentic  catalogue  of  these  first  foundations,  would  be  a 
rery  useful  and  entertaining  thing;  but  at  this  distance  of  time,  it  is  impossible 
to  gratify  the  world  with  any  such  curiosity,  whatever  pains  should  be  taken 
about  it  Yet  there  are  some  scattered  remains  and  fragments  to  be  collected 
eut  of  the  ancient  writers.'* — p.  57. 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  facte.  we  may  not  look  to  find  in  the 
writings  of  the  primitive  Church  anything  beyond  fragmentary  evi- 
dences in  regard  to  the  subject  of  priesthood,  and  to  those  we  appeal. 

WHAT  IS  PRIESTHOOD? 

We  may  first  enquire  as  to  what  the  priesthood  really  is.  Web- 
ster gives  a  fair  definition  when  he  says  it  is  uThe  order  of  men  set 
apart  for  sacred  oflices;  the  order  composed  of  priests."  Buck  in- 
forms us  that  a  priest  is  ;%a  person  set  apart  for  the  performance  of 
sacrifice,  and  otJf-r  omces  and  ceremonies  of  religion"  Both  Buck 
and  Webster  tell  us  that  "the  word  priest  is  a  contraction"  of  the 
word  .  and  :;of  the  same  import  with  Et<1?r"  Smith,  in 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  57 

his  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  says,  "Its  root-meaning  uncertain  as  far 
as  Hebrew  itself  is  concerned,  is  referred  by  Gesenius  to  the  idea  of 
prophecy."  He  further  says  that  Saalschutz  considers  the  primary 
meaning  of  the  word  as  equivalent  to  minister. 

ORIGIN  OF  PRIESTHOOD. 

Of  the  origin  of  the  priesthood  Smith  remarks: 

"The  idea  t>f  a  priesthood  connects  itself,  in  all  its  forms,  pure  or  corrupted, 
with  the  consciousness,  more  or  less  distinct,  of  sin.  Men  feel  that  they  have 
broken  a  law.  The  power  above  them  is  holier  than  they  are,  and  they  dare 
not  approach  it.  They  crave  for  the  intervention  of  some  one  of  whom  they 
•can  think  as  likely  to  be  more  acceptable  than  themselves.  He  must  offer  up 
their  prayers,  thanksgivings,  sacrifices.  He  becomes  their  representative  'in 
things  pertaining  to  God.1  He  may  become  also  (though  this  does  not  always 
follow)  the  representative  of  God  to  man.  The  functions  of  priest  and  prophet 
may  exist  in  the  same  man." 

The  foregoing  may  serve  to  place  the  subject  properly  in  the  mind 
of  the  reader,  and  dispel  any  prejudice  he  may  have  against  the 
idea  of  a  real,  genuine  priesthood  in  Christ's  Church,  and  to  forever 
explode  the  doctrine  held  by  some  that  a  priest  must  necessarily 
offer  bloody  sacrifices. 

ALL  CHRISTIANS  NOT  PRIESTS. 

Now,  Mr.  S.  claims  that  there  was  no  priesthood  in  the  primitive 
Church,  but  that  the  entire  body  of  Christians,  old  and  young,  male 
and  female,  ministers  and  members,  constituted  the  priesthood.  To 
prove  this,  he  quotes  1  Pet.  2  :  9,  Rev.  1  :  6,  etc.  Peter  says,  "But 
ye  are  a  chosen  generation,  a  royal  priesthood." 

Now  this  is  clearly  to  be  understood  in  a  qualified  and  restricted 
sense,  evidently  meaning  that  the  Church  as  "a  chosen  generation," 
and,  as  the  people  of  God,  possessed  within  their  midst  this  "royal 
priesthood." 

A  KINGDOM  OF  PRIESTS. 

A  passage  precisely  the  parallel  of  that  in  Peter  is  found  in  Ex. 
19  :  6;  and  its  interpretation  is  furnished  in  the  subsequent  facts  of 
Jewish  history,  so  that  there  can  be  no  cavil  as  to  what  was  intended 
in  the  promise  there  made.  It  reads,  "And  ye  [Israel]  shall  be  unto 
me  a  kingdom  of  priests,  and  a  holy  nation."  Now  this  certainly 
did  not  mean  that  each  individual  Israelite,  male  and  female,  should 
be  a  priest;  if  it  did,  then  the  promise  has  failed.  It  is  clear  that 
no  such  thing  was  intended,  but  only  that  as  a  nation  and  people 


58  The  Divine  Calling  of 

they  should  possess  the  distinguished  privilege  of  having  among 
them  heavenly  appointed  priests,  a  priesthood  appointed  of  God. 
Israel  was  "a  kingdom  of  priests/'  yet  the  priestly  office  was  restrict- 
ed and  confined  to  probably  less  than  one  in  thirty  of  their  number. 
The  primitive  church  was  "a  royal  priesthood/'  yet  the  priestly  office 
was  exercised  by  the  few,  and  not  by  all. 
The  learned  Bingham  says : — 

"But  when  his  [God's]  ministers  are  to  be  distinguished  from  the  rest  of  his 
people  in  the  church,  then  the  name  clerici,  or  clergy,  was  their  appropriate 
title,  and  the  name  of  the  other,  laymen.  Arid  this  observation  will  help  to  set 
another  sort  of  persons  right,  who  confound  not  only  the  names,  but  the  offices 
of  laity  and  clergy  together;  and  plead  that  originally  there  was  no  distinction 
between  them.  The  name  of  priesthood,  indeed,  is  sometimes  given  in  common 
to  the  whole  body  of  Christian  people ;  1  Pet.  2:9;  Rev.  1:6;  but  so  it  was  to 
the  Jewish  people,  Ex.  19:  6:  lYe  shall  be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests,  and 
an  holy  nation  ;'  yet  every  one  knows,  that  the  offices  of  priests  and  Levites 
among  the  Jews,  were  very  distinct  from  those  of  the  common  people,  not  by 
usurpation,  but  by  God's  appointment.  And  so  it  was  among  the  Christians, 
from  the  foundation  of  the  church/' — Ant.  Chris,  Church,  p.  40. 

Bingham  further  remarks: 

uTertullian  says  it  was  customary  among  heretics  to  confound  the  offices  of 
the  clergy  and  laity  together.'1 

The  reader  will  make  special  note  of  this.     Again : 

"St.  Jerome  observes,  They  [the  early  Christians]  reckoned  that  to  be  no 
church,  which  had  no  priests" 

Again  Bingham  says: 

"St.  Jerome,  who  will  be  allowed  to  speak  the  sense  of  the  ancients  *  *  * 
says  that  both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament  the  high  priests  are  an  order,  the 
priests  another,  and  the  Levites  another." — p.  50. 

"Tertullian,  in  his  book  De  Baptismo,  says,  The  right  of  baptizing  belongs  to 
the  chief  priests." 

Says  Bingham : 

"These  allegations,  are  sufficient  evidences,  as  to  matter  of  fact,  and  the  prac- 
tice of  the  church  in  the  first  three  ages,  that  there  was  then  an  order  of  chief 
priests,  or  bishops,  superior  to  the  presbyters,  settled  and  allowed  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church.1' 

Of  the  "chief  priests"  he  further  says : 

"It  was  no  human  invention,  but  an  original  settlement  of  the  apostles  them- 
selves,  which  they  made  by  divine  appointment.1' — p.  54. 

Again  Bingham: — 

"Now  this  is  most  expressly  said  by  Theodoret,  that  he  [Ignatius]  received 
the  gift  of  the  high  priesthood  from  the  hand  of  the  great  Peter.11 — p.  60. 


Joseph.  Smith  Defended.  59 

Again : — 

"If  it  be  enquired,  as  it  is  very  natural  to  ask  the  question,why  Optatus  gives 
all  three  order  of  Bishops,  Presbyters  [Elders]  and  Deacons,  the  title  of  priest • 
hood,  answer  is  plain  and  obvious;  because  according  to  him  every  order  had  its 
share  though  in  different  degrees,  in  the  Christian  priesthood.  "Which  is  not,  as 
some  imagine,  a  power  to  offer  Christ's  body  and  blood  really  upon  the  altar,  as 
a  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  the  quick  and  dead,  (which  is  such  a  notion  of  the 
Christian  priesthood,  as  no  ancient  author  or  ritual  ever  mentions);  but  it  con- 
sists in  a  power  and  authority  to  minister  publicly  according  to  God's-  apoicb- 
ment  in  holy  things,  or  things  pertaining  to  God.  And  there  are  several  parts 
to  this  power,  according  to  the  different  participation  of  which,  in  the  opinion 
of  Optatus,  Bishops,  Presbyters,  and  Deacons  had  each  their  respective  share  in 
the  priesthood.  Thus  it  was  one  act  of  the  priest's  office  to  offer  up  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  people's  prayers,  praises,  and  thanksgiving  to  God,  as  their  mouth 
and  orator,  and  to'make  intercession  to  God  for  them.  Another  part  of  the 
office  was  in  God's  name  to  bless  the  people,  particularly  by  admitting  them  to 
the  benefit  and  privilege  of  remission  of  sins  ly  spiritual  regeneration  or  "baptism*. 
And  thus  far  Deacons  were  anciently  allowed  to  minister  in  holy  things,  as  me- 
diators between  God  and  the  people.  Upon  which  account  a  late  learned 
writer  joins  entirely  with  Optatus,  in  declaring  Deacons  to  be  sharers  in  this 
lowest  degree  of  the  Christian  priesthood.  Above  this  was  the  power  of  offering 
up  to  God  the  people's  sacrifices  at  the  altar;  that  is,  as  Mr.  Mede  and  others 
explain  them,  first  the  eucharistical  oblations  of  bread  and  wine,  to  agnize  or 
acknowledge  God  to  be  the  Lord  of  the  creatures;  then  the  sacrifice  of  prayer 
and  thanksgiving  in  commemoration  of  Christ's  bloody  sacrifice  upon  the  cross, 
mystically  represented  in  the  creatures  of  bread  and  wine ;  which  whole  sacred 
action  was  commonly  called  the  Christians'  reasonable,  unbloody  sacrifice,  or  the 
sacrifice  of  the  altar.  Now  the  Deacons  (as  we  shall  see  in  another  chapter) 
were  never  allowed  to  ofter  these  oblations  at  the  altar,  but  it  was  always  a  pe- 
culiar act  of  the  Presbyter's  [Elder's]  office,  which  was  therefore  reckoned  a 
superior  degree  of  the  priesthood.  Another  act  of  the  priestly  office  was  to 
interpret  the  mind  and  will  of  God  to  the  people;  as  also  to  bless  them  solemnly 
in  his  name."— pps.  246,  247,  248. 

JOHN,    THE   APOSTLE,  A   PRIEST. 

We  now  turn  to  Eusebius,  from  -whose  writings  we  obtain  further 
evidence  that  there  was  a  priesthood  in  the  primitive  Christian 
Church.  First,  uPolycrates,  who  was  Bishop  of  the  church  of  Eph- 

esus,"  says: 

uJohn,  that  rested  on  the  bosom  of  our  Lord,  who  was  a  priest  that  bore  th©- 
sacerdotal  [priestly]  plate." 

This  plate  was  thought  by  some  to  be  similar  too,  if  not  identical 
the  ephod  of  the  high  priest. 

ORIGEN,    A   PRIEST. 

Eusebius  says  of  Origen,  "He  had  not  yet  obtained  the  priesthood 
by  the  laying  on  of  hands." — p.  240.  Again, :  ] 


6'0  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"At  this  time  Origen,  being  compelled  by -some  necessary  affairs  of  the  church, 
went  to  Greece  by  way  of  Palestine,  where  he  received  the  ordination  to  the 
priesthood,  at  Cesarea,  from  the  bishops  of  that  country.1' — p.  243. 

Much  more  evidence  might  be  given  from  this  source,  but  this 
may  suffice,  as  we  establish  the  fact  by  Busebius  that  there  was  a 
priesthood  in  the  primitive  ciiurch,  and  that  it  could  be  obtained 
only  by  legal  ordination,  and  not  t>y  virtue  of  being  merely  a  mem- 
ber, as  Mr.  S.  claims.  We  further  see  that  the  Apostle  John  '-was 
a  priest  that  bore  the  sacerdotal  plate," — the  insignia  of  the  high 
priest.  From  Bingham  we  learn,  by  abundant  proofs,  not  only  that 
there  was  in  the  primitive  church  an  ordained  priesthood,  but  one 
•of  degrees,  and  that  it  was  '-no  invention''  of  man,  but  ordained  of 
God,  and  that  none  but  heretics  opposed  the  idea.  We  also  learn 
that  there  were  "chief  priests/'  "high  priests/'  "priests,"  and  "Le- 
vites."  We  also  learn  from  him  of  the  distinction  of  their  respec- 
tive offices,  and  of  their  degrees  of  authority  and  spiritual  power. 
We  also  learn  how  the  early  Christians  interpreted  1  Pet.  2  :  5  and 
Rev.  1:6.  that  they  interpreted  them  as  meaning  the  same  as  the 
promise  in  Ex.  19  :  6,  viz..  that  there  was  in  the  church  "a  royal 
priesthood/'  and  not  that  every  member  was  an  officiating  priest,  as 
Mr.  S.  and  his  kind  would  hold.  Such  a  claim  is  the  height  of  ab- 
surdity, and  savors  much  of  "Mystery  Babylon." 
TRANSMISSION  OF  PRIESTHOOD. 

Not  only  was  there  a  priesthood  in  the  primitive  church,  but  there 
were  strict  rales  in  regard  to  its  transmission.  As  it  was  important 
tinder  the  law  that  "no  man  taketh  this  honor  unto  himself,  but  he 
that  is  called  of  God  as  was  Aaron/'  so  under  the  gospel,  it  was,  and 
is,  essential  that  no  man  takes  the  ministry  or  priesthood  upon  him- 
self, except  -he  be  called  of  God  a,nd  ordained  according  to  the  divine 
yule.  Persons  taking  part  in  the  ministry  must  be  ordained  by  those 
having  authority,  otherwise  their  ministrations  are  valueless.  To 
act  "in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
•Ghost,"  is  to  act  by  their  authority.  This  authority  no  one  can  get 
from  the  Bible,  but  only  by  being  divinely  called  and  set  apart  to 
minister  in  that  name.  It  would  be  far  more  safe  and  proper  for 
persons  to  read  the  statutes  of  our  land,  and  then,  without  being 
•duly  called  to,  and  legally  qualified  in  an  office,  to  undertake  to 
officiate  therein,  than  to  read  the  Bible  and  then,  without  divine 
•calling  and  consecration,  undertake  to  officiate  in  the  things  of  God. 
Are  the  things  of  God  less  important  than  those  of  human  govern- 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  61 

merits?  And  should  they  not  be  more  carefully  guarded?  Should 
the  offices  in  Christ's  church  be  less  protected  from  encroachment, 
from  lawlessness,  abuse  and*  confusion,  than  the  offices  in  humai* 
governments?  To  state  these  questions  is  to  answer  them,  with  any 
thoughtful,  unprejudiced  mind. 

Mr.  S.  claims  that  the  Aaronic  priesthood  was  not  in  the  primi- 
tive Church.  He  says,  "It  never  had  a  place  there."  Possibly  it 
did  not,  so  far  as  name  is  concerned,  and  yet  be  in  it  in  fact,  so  far 
as  authority  is  co&cerned.  This  authority,  or  priesthood,  was  not 
denominated  Aaronic  or  Levitical,  until,  in  Israel,  it  was  given  to- 
Aaron  and  the  family  of  Levi,  yet  the  same  priesthood  in  kind  ex- 
isted before,— Ex.  38  :  l-3;  41;  Num.  3  : 12, 

MELCHIZEDEK  PRIESTHOOD, 

Mr.  S.  also  tells  us  that  the  Melchizedek  priesthood  was  not  ia 
the  Church;  and  further,  that  Christ  was  not  a  priest  tiH  he  reached 
heaven !  If  no  one  can  hold  the  Melchizedek  priesthood  on  earth, 
how  did  ifc  happen  that  Melchizedek  was  so  favored  as  to  hold  and 
exercise  it  in  the  times  of  Abraham?  If  Christ  did  not  hold  priest- 
hood on  earth,  by  what  authority  did  he  baptize,  ordain  others-, 
preach  the  gospel,  and  administer  the  sacrament  of  bread  and  wine  ? 
He  was  very  particular  to  comply  with  the  law  of  baptism,  and  is  it 
presumable-  that  he  would  be*  less  particular  in*  respect  to  priestly 
prerogatives?  He  verily  performed  the  functions  of  a  priest,  even 
to  the  offering  of  a  bloody  sacrifice,  which  he  offered  upon  the  cross; 
and  shall  we  say  that  he  did  all  this  without  holding  priesthood 
authority?'  Nay,  verily.  The  idea  is  as  false  as  it  is  derogatory  to- 
the  character  of  our  Great  High  Priest.  He  was  priest  when  he 
offered  himself  upon  Calvary  for  a  ruined  race ;  and  he  was  a  priest 
before  that — lie  was  manifestly  one  from  the  beginning  of  his  min- 
istry. 

"But,"  says  Mr.  S.,  "Paul  says,  'If  he  were  on  earth  he  should 
not  be  a  priest,  seeing  that  there  are  priests  that  offer  gifts  aecordS- 
ing  to  the  law.'"  Precisely;  he  would  not  be  that  kind  of  a  priest 
of  which  Paul  is  speaking — an  Aaronic  priest,  but  this  is  not  to  say 
but  what  he  would  be  a  Melchizedek  priest. 

CHRIST  WAS  A  MELCBIZEDEK  PRIEST. 

Christ  was  a  priest  while  on  earth,  for  it  was  here  that  he  began 
the  work  of  sacrifice  and  offering.  None  could  administer  in  that 
respect  unless  he  was  a  priest.  The  sacrifices  and  offerings  of 


82  The  Divine  Calling  of 

Christ  and  his  ministry  differ  in  kind  from  those  of  the  Aaronic 
priests  under  the  law,  yet  both  orders  of  priests  ministered  before 
the  Lord.  And  that  Christ  was  a  Melchizedek  priest  while  on 
earth,  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  "the  high  priest  entereth  into  the  holy 
place;"  so  Christ  must  be  a  high  priest  before  he  could  enter  into 
the  antitypical  "holy  place/'  even  heaven,  (Heb.  9  :  23-25). 

OTHER  MELCHIZEDEK  PRIESTS. 

We  have  shown,  on  pages  13  and  14,  that  Moses  held  higher 
priesthood  than  Aaron;  and  that  Jethro  was  a  priest  of  God,  though 
not  of  the  order  of  Aaron;  also  that  many  of  the  patriarchs,  includ- 
ing Melchizedek,  were  priests;  and  we  have  also  shown  the  proba- 
bilities of  some  of  them  having  been  of  the  Jhigher  order  with  Mel- 
chizedek. And  we  are  not  alone  in  concluding  that  they  were  Mel- 
chizedek priests.  Smith,  in  his  Dictionary  of  the  Bille,  says  that 
the  New  Testament  writers  "recognize  in  Christ,  the  First-born,  the 
King,  the  Anointed,  the  Representative  of  the  true  primeval  priest- 
Jiood  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek,  from  which  that  of  Aaron,  how- 
ever necessary  for  the  time,  is  now  seen  to  have  been  a  deflection. " 
— Art.  Priest.  This  is  the  very  sensible  result  of  his  profound  re- 
searches upon  this  subject;  and  it  is  in  harmony  with  the  state- 
ments made  by  Joseph  Smith,  the  young  prophet  and  seer,  in  Doc- 
trine and  Covenants  104  :  3  : 

"There  are,  in  the  Church,  two  priesthoods,  namely:  the  Melchizedek,  and 
the  Aaronic,  including  the  Levitical  priesthood.  Why  the  first  is  called  the 
Melchizedek  priesthood  is  because  Melchizedek  was  such  a  great  high  priest: 
before  his  day  it  was  called  the  holy  priesthood  after  the  order  of  the  Son  of  God: 
•but  out  of  respect  or  reverence  to  the  name  of  the  Supreme  Being,  to  avoid  the 
<too  frequent  repetition  of  his  name,  they,  the  church,  in  ancient  days,  called 
that  priesthood  after  Melchizedek,  or  the  Melchizedek  priesthood.  All  other 
•authorities,  or  offices  in  the  church  are  appendages  to  this  priesthood ;  but  there 
are  two  divisions,  or  grand  heads — one  is  the  Melchizedek  priesthood,  and  the 
rother  is  the  Aaronic,  or  Levitieal  priesthood.  *  *  *  The  second  priesthood  is 
called  the  priesthood  of  Aaron,  because  it  was  conferred  upon  Aaron  and  his 
seed,  throughout  all  their  generations.  Why  it  is  called  the  lesser  priesthood 
is,  because  it  is  an  appendage  to  the  greater,  or  the  Melchizedek  priesthood." 

Here  is  furnished  a  reasonable  solution  of  what  would  otherwise 
be  a  very  complicated  and  troublesome  question.  That  there  were 
various  priestly  offices  before  the  law,  under  the  law,  and  under  the 
•gospel,  is  manifest  from  the  Scriptures  and  church  history;  but  their 
respective  degrees  of  authority,  their  duties,  rights,  and  privileges, 
as  also  the  manner  in  which  they  were  conferred  and  transmitted, 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  63 

are  matters  not  so  clearly  and  definitely  stated  as  could  be  desired. 
If  we  had  all  the  sacred  writings  given  before  the  law,  under  the  law, 
and  under  the  gospel,  with  the  full  history  of  the  church  for  the 
first  three  centuries,  then,  no  doubt,  much  if  not  all  of  the  difficulty 
that  now  surrounds  this  subject  would  be  removed. 

BOTH  PRIESTHOODS  BUT  ONE. 

It  would  seem  that  before  the  law,  all  the  priestly  offices  were 
held  as  belonging  to  one  priesthood;  and  that  also  under  the  gospel 
they  were  so  held,  though  the  same  priestly  authority  that  was  con- 
ferred upon  Aaron  and  his  seed  existed  before  the  times  of  the  law, 
and  was  likewise  in  the  church  after  the  law,  as  a  code,  was  abro- 
gated. Both  priesthoods  are  but  one  priesthood,  and  are  two  only 
in  the  sense  of  there  being  two  divisions. 

"All  other  authorities,  or  offices  in  the  church  [including  the  Aaronic  priest- 
hood] are  appendages  [something  added]  to  this  [Melchizedek]  priesthood." 
D.  &0.  104:3. 

This  may  account  for  there  being  more  offices  in  the  early  Christian 
Church  than  there  appears  to  have  been  among  God's  people  in  the 
times  of  the  patriarchs,  though  both  peoples  held  to  the  same  priest- 
hood. And  it  may  also  explain  any  real  or  seeming  difference  in 
the  arrangement  of  the  priesthood  in  the  church  now,  from  what 
there  was  in  any  former  time. 

OFFICES  OF  PRIESTHOOD. 

"When  he  [Christ]  ascended  up  on  high,  he  led  captivity  captive,  and  gave 
gifts  unto  men.  *  *  *  And  he  gave  some,  apostles ;  and  some,  prophets ;  and 
some,  evangelists;  and  some,  pastors  and  teachers." — Eph.  4:  8-11. 

These  were  different  officers,  yet  all  and  each  possessed  authority 
in  the  priesthood  of  the  Christian  Church.  And  it  is  a  fact  to  be 
borne  in  mind,  that  all  these  were  not  called  and  ordained  at  once, 
but  only  as  the  Master  saw  that  there  was  need  for  them;  and  this 
principal  applies  with  equal  propriety  in  these  latter  times. 

JOHN  BAPTIST  RESURRECTED. 

We  had  almost  forgotten  to  reply  to  another  marvelous  objection  of 
Mr.  S.  He  claims  that  it  should  be  proven  if  John  the  Baptist 
"was  raised  from  the  dead  before  ordaining  Joseph/'  The  Scrip- 
tures teach  that 

"Many  bodies  of  the  saints  which  slept  arose,  and  came  out  of  the  graves 
after  his  resurrection,  and  went  into  the  holy  city,  and  appeared  unto  many." 
—Matt.  27:52,  53. 


64  The  Divine  Calling  of 

Is  there  anything  incredible  in  the  idea  that  John  was  one  of  that 
number?  We  think  not.  It  is  probable  that  all  the  bodies  of  the- 
Saints  who  were  found  worthy  came  forth  at  that  time ;  and  none, 
we  trust,  will  question  the  worthiness  of  John. 

JOSEPH  AND  OLIVER  ORDAINED  BY  JOHN  BAPTIST. 

"How  [says  Mr.  S.]  did  Joseph  know  that  it  was  John  that  ordained  him?"" 
Probably  in  a  similar  manner  as  Daniel  knew  that  it  was  "the 
man  Gabriel"  whom  lie  had  seen  in  a  vision,  (Dan.  9  :  21);  or  that 
Mary  knew  that  it  was  "the  angel  Gabriel"  that  ministered  to  her, 
(Luke  1  :  26);  or  that  Paul  knew  that  it  was  Jesus  that  appeared  unto 
him  in  the  way  to  Damascus.  These  parties  were  fully  satisfied  that 
the  ministrations  in  their  cases  were  genuine  and  really  divine.  All 
the  surrounding  condition  were  such  as  to  forbid  imposture.  So  in 
regard  to  the  ordination  of  Joseph  and  Oliver  by  the  angel,  John 
the  Baptist.  We  herewith  subjoin  portions  of  their  account  of  that 
very  remarkable  event.  Joseph  says : 

"We  still  continued  the  work  of  translation,  when,  in  the  ensuing  month, 
(May,  1829),  we  on  a  certain  day  went  into  the  woods  to  pray  and  inquire  of 
the  Lord  respecting  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins,  as  we  found  mentioned 
in  the  translation  of  the  plates.  While  we  were  thus  employed,  praying  and 
calling  upon  the  Lord,  a  messenger  from  heaven  descended  in  a  cloud  of  light 
and  having  laid  his  hands  upon  us,  he  ordained  us,  saying  unto  us,  'Upon  you, 
my  fellow  servants,  in  the  name  of  Messiah,  I  confer  the  Priesthood  of  Aaron, 
which  holds  the  keys  of  the  ministering  of  angels,  and  of  the  gospel  of  repent- 
ance, and  of  baptism  by  immersion  for  the  remission  of  sins;  and  this  shall  never 
be  taken  again  from  the  earth,  until  the  sons  of  Levi  do  offer  again  an  offering 
unto  the  Lord  in  righteousnes.1 " — Times  &  Seasons,  vol.  3,  p.  726, 

Oliver's  testimony  is  as  follows : 

"After  writing  the  account  given  of  the  Savior's  ministry  to  the  remnant  of 
the  seed  of  Jacob,  upon  this  continent,  it  was  easily  to  be  seen,  as  the  prophet 
said  would  be,  that  darkness  covered  the  earth  and  gross  darkness  the  minds  of 
the  people.  On  reflecting  further,  it  was  easily  to  be  seen,  that  amid  the  great 
strife  and  noise  concerning  religion,  none  had  authority  from  (Grod  to  administer 
the  ordinances  of  the  gospel.  For,  the  question  might  be*  asked,  have  men 
authority  to  administer  in  the  name  of  Christ,  who  deny  revelation  ?  when  his 
testimony  is  no  less  than  the  spirit  of  prophecy?  arM  his  religion  based,  built, 
and  sustained  by  immediate  revelations  in  all  ages  of  the  world,  when  he  has 
had  a  people  on  earth  ?  If  these  facts  were  buried,  and  carefully  concealed  by 
men  whose  craft  would  have  been  in  danger,  if  once  permitted  to  shine  in  the 
faces  of  men,  they  were  no  longer  to  us;  and  we  only  waited  for  the  command- 
ment to  be  given,  'Arise  and  be  baptized.' 

"This  was  not  long  desired  before  it  was  realized.  The.  Lord,  who  is  rich  in 
mercy T  and  ever  willing  to>  answer  the  consistent  praye?  of  the  humble,  after  we 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  65 

had  called  upon  him  in  a  fervent  manner,  aside  from  the  abodes  of  men,  con- 
descended to  manifest  to  us  his  will.  On  a  sudden,  as  from  the  midst  of  eternity, 
the  voice  of  the  Redeemer  spake  peace  to  us,  while  the  veil  was  parted,  and 
the  angel  of  God  came  down  clothed  with  glory,  and  delivered  the  anxiously 
ooked  for  message,  and  the  keys  of  the  gospel  of  repentance !  What  joy !  What 
wonder!  What  amazement!  While  the  world  was  racked  and  distracted — 
while  the  millions  were  groping  as  the  blind  for  the  wall,  and  while  all  men 
were  resting  upon  uncertainty,  as  a  general  mass,  our  eyes  beheld — our  ears 
heard.  As  in  the  'blaze  of  day;'  yes,  more — above  the  glitter  of  the  May  sun- 
beam, which  then  shed  its  brilliancy  over  the  face  of  nature!  Then  his  voice, 
though  mild,  pierced  to  the  centre,  and  his  words,  *I  am  thy  fellow-servant,1 
dispelled  every  fear.  We  listened — we  gazed — we  admired !  'Twas  the  voice 
of  the  angel  from  glory — 'twas  a  message  from  the  Most  High !  and  as  we  heard 
we  rejoiced,  while  his  love  enkindled  upon  our  souls,  and  we  were  rapt  in  the 
vision  of  the  Almighty!  Where  was  room  for  doubt?  Nowhere:  uncertainty 
had  fled,  doubt  had  sunk,  no  more  to  rise,  while  fiction  and  deception  had  fled 
forever ! 

uBut,  dear  brother,  think,  further  think  for  a  moment,  what  joy  filled  our 
hearts,  and  with  what  surprise  we  must  have  bowed  (for  who  would  not  have 
bowed  the  knee  for  such  a  blessing?)  when  we  received  under  his  hand  the 
holy  priesthood,  as  he  said,  lUpon  you,  my  fellow  servants,  in  the  name  of 
Messiah,  I  confer  this  priesthood,  and  this  authority,  which  shall  remain  upon 
earth,  that  the  sons  of  Levi  may  yet  offer  an  offering  unto  the  Lord  in  right- 
eousness." 

"I  shall  not  attempt  to  paint  to  you  the  feelings  of  this  heart,  nor  the  majestic 
beauty  and  glory  which  surrounded  us  on  this  occasion ;  but  you  will  believe 
.  me  when  I  say,  that  earth,  nor  men,  with  the  eloquence  of  time,  cannot  begin 
to  clothe  language  in  as  interesting  and  sublime  a  manner  as  this  holy  per- 
sonage. No :  nor  has  this  earth  power  to  give  the  joy,  to  bestow  the  peace,  or 
comprehend  the  wisdom  which  was  contained  in  each  sentence  as  they  were 
delivered  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit !  Man  may  deceive  his  fellow  man ; 
deception  may  follow  deception,  and  the  children  of  the  wicked  one  may  have 
power  to  seduce  the  foolish  and  untaught,  till  nought  but  fiction  feeds  the  many, 
and  the  fruit  of  falsehood  carries  in  its  current  the  giddy  to  the  grave ;  but  one 
touch  with  the  finger  of  his  love,  yes,  one  ray  of  glory  from  the  upper  world, 
or  one  word  from  the  mouth  of  the  Savior,  from  the  bosom  of  eternity,  strikes 
it  all  into  insignificance,  and  blots  it  forever  from  the  mind !  The  assurance  that 
we  were  in  the  presence  of  an  angel ;  the  certainty  that  we  heard  the  voice  of 
Jesus,  and  the  truth  unsullied  as  it  flowed  from  a  pure  personage,  dictated  by 
the  will  of  God,  is  to  me  past  description,  and  I  shall  ever  look  upon  this  ex- 
pression of  the  Savior's  goodness  with  wonder  and  thanksgiving  while  I  am 
permitted  to  tarry,  and  in  those  mansions  where  perfection  dwells,  and -sin  never 
comes,  I  hope  to  adore  in  that  DAY  which  shall  never  cease!1' — Messenger  and 
Advocate,  October,  1834. 

Where  was  there  a  chance  for  these  men  to  be  deceived  ?  Their 
hearts  were  set  to  do  the  will  of  God;  and  at  the  time  of  the  vision 
they  had  gone  "aside  from  the  abodes  of  men/'  and  called  upon  the 
Lord  in  a  fervent  manner,  or,  as  Joseph  puts  it,  "We,  on  a  certain 


.66  The  Divine  Calling  of 

day,  went  into  the  woods  to  pray  and  inquire  of  the  Lord ;"  and  here, 
under  these  circumstances,  they  heard  Hhe  voice  of  the  Lord/'  and, 
"The  vail  was  parted  and  the  angel  of  the  Lord  carne  down  clothed 
with  glory;  *  *  *  then  his  voice,  though  mild,  pierced  to  the  cen- 
ter, and  his  words,  'I  am  thy  fellow  servant'  dispelled  every  fear/7 
Surely,  we  may  say  with  Oliver,  "Where  was  room  for  doubt?" 
It  is  preposterous  to  claim  that  they  were  deceived.  The  whole  of 
the  surroundings  of  the  case,  as  they  give  it,  utterly  forbid  such  an 
idea.  They  saw  the  vision,  and  received  the  ordination,  as  they 
claim,  under  the  hands  of  the  angel,  or  else  they  were  the  vilest  im- 
postors known  to  history.  They  could  not  have  been  deceived  in 
the  matter.  These  men  lived  and  died  bearing  this  testimony,  Jo- 
seph Smith  at  Carthage  Jail,  Illinois,  and  Oliver  Cowdery  at  or  near 
Far  West,  Caldwell  county,  Missouri. 

We  have  occupied  more  space  in  considering  this  question  of  the 
priesthood,  and  its  restoration  in  the  latter  days,  than  we  had  in- 
tended. The  only  apology  that  we  offer,  is,  that  the  subject  seems 
.to  demand  it. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

LEHI'S   PLATES    OF   BRASS. 

Mr.  S.  thinks  he  has  discovered  another  error  in  the  prophecy  of 
Lehi  respecting  the  brass  plates,  where  he  says  that 

"These  plates  of  brass  should  go  forth  unto  all  nations,  kindreds,  tongues,  and 
people,  who  were  of  his  seed." — 1  Xephi  1 :  48. 

Mr.  S.  says: 

"Whether  this  language  be  applied  to  the  material  of  the  brass  plates,  or  to 
the  record  contained  upon  them,  the  statement  has  proven  untrue.  These 
plates  of  brass  are  represented  as  having  been  carefully  preserved  by  the 
.Nephites,  and  to  have  been  handed  down  by  them  till  the  days  of  Mormon,  be- 
ing carefully  kept  from  the  Lamanites,  who  were  of  Lehi's  seed.1' 

This  is  a  technical  quibble  at  most,  and  Mr.  S.  might  with  equal 
propriety  question  the  prophecy  of  Jesus,  in  Luke  21  :  24.  But 
how  does  Mr.  S.  know  that  the  Lamanites  were  reckoned  as  the 
"seed"  mentioned  in  Lehi's  prophecy?  The  prophecy  implies  that 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  67 

the  plates  would  go  only  to  the  righteous;  and  subsequent  history 
shows  that  they  did  go  only  to  them,  while  the  contents  of  the  plates 
went  to  many  of  Lehi's  posterity  who  were  not  righteous.  The 
plates  and  other  sacred  things,  were  to  be  handed  down  "from  one 
prophet  to  another,"  (1  Nephi  5  :  47),  and  so  they  were,  until  they 
reached  Mormon,  who  hid  them  up  unto  the  Lord,  and  wrote  as 
follows : 

"Having  been  commanded  of  the  Lord  that  I  should  not  suffer  that  the 
records  which  had  been  handed  down  by  our  fathers,  which  were  sacred,  to 
fall  into  the  hands  of  the  Lamanites,  (for  the  Lamanites  would  destroy  them), 
therefore  I  made  this  record  out  of  the  plates  of  Nephi,  and  hid  up  in  the  hill 
Cumorah,  all  the  records  which  had  been  entrusted  to  me  by  the  hand  of  the 
Lord,  save  it  were  these  few  plates  which  I  gave  unto  my  son  Moroni."—- 
Mormon  3:2. 

This  confirms  the  supposition  that  the  plates  of  brass  were  de- 
signed to  go  to  none  others  than  the  righteous  of  Lehi's  posterity; 
and  the  recorded  facts  of  history  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  show  its 
accomplishment.  In  1  Nephi  1 :  23,  35,  46,  47,  we  first  learn  of 
the  plates  of  brass,  and  something  of  their  contents;  and  in  para- 
graphs 25,  49,  we  learn  the  purpose  for  which  they  were  taken  from 
Laban;  and  in  chapter  6:1,  we  find  them  in  the  hands  of  the 
prophet  Nephi,  as  the  teacher  of  his  people;  and  in  chapter  5  : 47, 
we  further  learn  that  the  Lord  purposed  that  these  records,  with 
other  "sacred  things,"  should  "be  kept  for  the  knowledge"  of 
Nephi's  people. 

From  Nephi  they  passed  on  down  among  the  righteous,  "from  one 
prophet  to  another,"  going  first  to  Jacob  (&) ;  Jacob  to  Enos  (7) ; 
Enos  to  Jaroni  (m);  Jarom  to  Omni  (V);  Omni  to  Amaron  (o) 
Amaron  to  Chemish  (j>);  Chemishto  Abinadom  (#);  Abinadorn  to 
Amaleki  (V);  Amaleki  to  Benjamin  (s);  Benjamin  to  Mosiah  (7); 
Mosiah  2nd  to  Alma  (11) ;  Alma  to  Helaman  (i?) ;  Helaman  to  Shib- 
lon  (z0);  Shiblon  to  Helaman  2nd  (x)  Helaman  to  Nephi  (y); 
Nephi  to  Nephi  2nd  (z) ;  Nephi  to  Amos  (a) ;  Amos  to  Amos  2nd 
(6);  Amos  2nd  to  Amaron  (c);  Amaron  to  Mormon  (<#);  Mormon 
hides  them  up  in  Cumorah,  except  those  given  to  Moroni  (e),  and 
Moroni  hides  up  the  balance  (/). 

In  this  long  line  of  transmission,  we  see  that  the  sacred  things,  in- 


(fc)  Jacob  1:1;  (Z)  Jacob  5:9;  (m)  Jarom  1:1;  (w)  Jarom  1:6;  (o)  Omni  1:2;  (p)  Omni 

:  3 ;  (3)  Omni  1:5;  (r)  Omni  1:6;  (s)  Omni  1  : 12  ;  ft)  Mosiah  1:3;   (w)  Mosiah  13  : 1 ; 

(v)  Alma  17 :  5 ;  (w)  Alma  30  : 1 ;  (a;)  Alma  30 :  5 ;  (y)  Helaman  2:6;  (z)  Nephi  1  : 1 ;  (a) 


Nephi  1:6;  (6)  Nephi  1:7;  (c)  Nephi  1 :  11 ;  (d)  Mormon  1:1;  2:3;  (e)  Mormon  3:2; 
(/)  Moroni  10:  1. 


68  The  Divine  Calling  of 

eluding  the  brass  plates,  were  kept  among  the  righteous  of  Lehi's 
posterity,  thus  establishing  the  idea  that  only  the  righteous  of 
Lehi's  posterity  were  the  promised  "seed."  Nor  is  this  method  of 
interpretation  peculiar : 

"They  which  be  of  faith  are  blessed  with  faithful  Abraham."— Gal.  3 :  &. 
"And  if  ye  be  Christ's  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed,  and  heirs  according  to  the- 
promise." — v.  29.  "They  which  are  the  children  of  the  flesh,  these  are  not  the 
children  of  God;  but  the  children  of  promise  are  counted  for  the  seed." — 
Rom.  9:  8. 

The  principle  applying  in  the  case  of  Abraham,  applies  equally 
well  in  the  case  of  Lehi.  The  Lord  said  that  it  was  not  meet  for 
him,  Lehi,  that  he  should  take  his  family  into  the  wilderness  alone* 
but  that  his  sons  should  take  daughters  to  wife,  that  they  might 
"raise  up  seed  unto  the  Lord  in  the  land  of  promise."  Those  who* 
by  righteousness  proved  themselves  to  be  the  Lord's  "seed,"  were 
the  seed  of  righteous  Lehi,  and  the  ones  to  whom  the  promise 
was  made. 

WHO  SHOULD  SEE  PLATES  OF  MORMON. 

And  now  comes  one  of  the  characteristic  perversions  of  Mr.  S. 
He  says: 

"The  plates  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  were  to  be  seen  by  three  witnesses,  and 
lnone  else;'  yet  they  were  shown  to  eight  others." 

And  to  prove  his  assertion,  he  quotes  D.  0.4:3: 

i;This  generation  shall  have  my  word  through  you ;  and  in  addition  to  your 
testimony,  the  testimony  of  three  of  my  servants,  whom  I  shall  call  and  ordain, 
tmto  whom  I  [will]  show  these  things,  and  they  shall  go  forth  with  my  words 
that  are  given  through  you ;  yea,  they  shall  know  of  a  surety  that  these  things 
are  true;  for  from  heaven  will  I  declare  it  unto  them;  I  will  give  them  power 
that  they  may  behold  and  view  these  things  as  they  are;  and  to  none  else  will. 
I  grant  this  power  to  receive  this  [same]  testimony,  among  this  generation." 

In  the  first  place  Mr.  S.  has  not  quoted  correctly,  and  in  the  next 
place  he  has  utterly  perverted  the  sense  and  intention  of  the  test. 
The  word  will  enclosed  in  brackets,  he  has  quoted  shall;  the  word 
same,  enclosed  in  brackets,  he  has  left  entirely  out.  In  this  we  see 
recklessness  and  unreliability,  whether  for  want  of  honest  purpose, 
or  through  lack  of  mental  calibre,  we  shall  not  undertake  to  decide. 
The  word  same  is  very  essential  to  the  passage,  as  it  points  to  the 
identity  and  quality  of  the  testimony  spoken  of.  No  one  but  the 
three,  in  connection  with  Joseph,  should  have  "this  same  testimony" 
relative  to  the  plates;  which  testimony  was,  (1)  the  hearing  the; 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  69 

voice  of  God  out  of  heaven  concerning  the  plates,  and  their  trans- 
lation by  Joseph;  and  (2)  that  the  Lord,  (not  man),  would  show 
the  plates  unto  them: 

"They  shall  know  of  a  surety  that  these  things  are  true,  for  from  lieaven  will  I 
[GodJ  declare  it  unto  them;  I  [God]  will  give  them  power  that  they  may  be- 
hold and  view  these  things  as  they  are ;  and  to  none  else  will  I  grant  this  power 
to  receive  this  same  testimony,  among  this  generation." — D.  &  C.  4:  3. 

Nothing  is  here  said  or  intimated  that  no  others  were  to  see  the 
plates,  but  only  that  no  others  were  to  see  and  hear,  and  know  of 
them  in  the"same  manner.  The  testimony  of  the  Book  of  Mormon 
relative  to  the  plates  being  shown  is  as  follows : 

"And  behold,  ye  [Joseph]  may  be  privileged  that  ye  may  show  the  plates 
unto  those  who  shall  assist  to  bring  forth  this  work :  and  unto  three  shall  they  be 
shown  by  the  power  of  God:  wherefore  they  shall  know  of  a  surety  that  these 
things  are  true." — Ether  2:1. 

By  this  we  learn  that  Joseph  was  privileged  to  show  the  plates 
unto  those  who  should  assist  to  bring  forth  the  Book  of  Mormon; 
and  then  that  "unto  three  shall  they  be  shown  by  the  power  of  God." 
Again : 

u Wherefore,  at  that  day  when  the  book  shall  be  delivered  unto  the  man  of 
whom  I  have  spoken,  the  book  shall  be  hid  from  the  eyes  of  the  world,  that 
the  eyes  of  none  shall  behold  it,  save  it  be  that  three  witnesses  shall  behold  it  by 
the  power  of  God,  besides  him  to  whom  the  book  shall  be  delivered,  and  they 
shall  testify  to  the  truth  of  the  book  and  the  things  therein.  And  there  is 
none  other  which  shall  view  it,  save  it  be  a  few,  according  to  the  will  of  God, 
to  bear  testimony  of  his  word  unto  the  children  of  men." — 2  Nephi  11: 17. 

PLATES,  BREAST-PLATE,  ETC. 

Mr.  S.  next  says : 

"These  three  witnesses  were  not  only  to  see  the  plates,  but  also  other  things 
mentioned  in  a  revelation  to  Joseph  for  the  three.  'Behold,  I  say  unto  you,  that 
you  must  rely  upon  my  word,  which  if  you  do,  with  full  purpose  of  heart,  you 
shall  have  a  view  of  the  plates,  and  also1  of  the  breast-plate,  the  sword  of  Laban, 
the  Urim  and  Thummim,  which  was  given  to  the  brother  of  Jared  upon  the 
mount,  when  he  talked  with  the  Lord  face  to  face,  and  the  miraculous  directors 
which  were  given  to  Lehi  while  in  the  wilderness,  on  the  borders  of  the  Red 
Sea;  and  it  is  by  your  faith  that  you  shall  obtain  a  view  of  them,  even  by  that 
faith  which  was  had  by  the  prophets  of  old.  And  after  that  you  have  obtained 
faith,  and  have  seen  them  with  your  eyes,  you  shall  testify  of  them.'  But  they 
never  testified  of  them;  hence  the  revelation  is  unreliable." 

How  does  Mr.  S.  know  that  they  never  testified  to  seeing  them? 
Hundreds  of  people  are  now  living  who  will  bear  witness  that  they 
did  testify  that  they  saw  them.  And  besides,  if  they  had  never 


70  The  Divine  Calling  of 

seen  them,  it  would  not  prove  that  "the  revelation  is  unreliable/'  as 
Mr.  S.  affirms,  unless  it  could  be  shown  that  they,  on  their  part, 
complied  with  the  conditions  of  the  promise.  Mr.  S.  says,  impliedly, 
that  they  were  to  testify  to  seeing  them  by  a  icritten  statement. 
This  he  is  not  warranted  in  doing.  It  is  neither  expressed,  nor  im- 
plied, that  they  were  to  give  a  icritten  statement  of  seeing  the  breast- 
plate, Urim  and  Thummim,  etc. 

o.  COWDERY'S  TESTIMONY. 

As  to  seeing  the  "Urim  and  Thurnmmi,"  0.  Cowdery,  in  a  letter 
to  W.  W.  Phelps,  Sept.  7th,  1834,  writes: 

"Near  the  time  of  the  setting  of  the  sun,  Sabbath  evening,  April  5,  1829,  my 
natural  eyes,  for  the  first  time  beheld  this  brother,  [Joseph  Smith] .  He  then 
resided  in  Harmony,  Susquehanna  county,  Pennsylvania.  On  Monday,  the  6th, 
I  assisted  him  in  arranging  some  business  of  a  temporal  nature,  and  on  Tuesday 
the  7th,  commenced  to  write  the  Book  of  Mormon. 

"These  were  days  never  to  be  forgotten — to  sit  under  the  sound  of  a  voice 
dictated  by  the  inspiration  of  Heaven,  awakened  the  utmost  gratitude  of  this 
bosom!  Day  after  day  I  continued,  uninterrupted,  to  write  from  his  mouth,  as 
he  translated  with  the  Urim  and  Thummim,  or,  as  the  Nephites  would  have 
said,  'Interpreters,'  the  history,  or  record,  called  lthe  Book  of  Mormon.1 " — 
Messenger  and  Advocate,  Vol.  1,  No.  1:  also  Latter  Day  Saints'1  Herald,  Yol.  2. 
No.  3. 

D.  WHITMER'S  TESTIMONY. 

David  Whitmer,  now  living  at  Richmond,  Mo.,  one  of  "'the  three 
witnesses,"  recently  said  to  a  reporter  of  the  Chicago  Times,  that  he 
had  free  access  to  the  room  where  the  translation  was  going  on,  at 
the  time  Joseph  and  Oliver  were  at  his  father's  house,  (for'they 
went  there  from  Harmony), 

"And  was  an  eye-witness  to  the  method  of  procedure.  The  plates  were  not 
before  Joseph  while  he  translated.  *  *  *  The  method  pursued  was  common- 
place, but  nevertheless  effective.  Having  placed  the  Urim  and  Thummim  in 
his  hat,  Joseph  placed  the  hat  over  his  face,  and  with  prophetic  eyes  read  the 
invisible  symbols,  syllable  by  syllable  and  word  by  word,  while  Cowdery  or 
Harris  acted  as  recorders.  *  *  So  illiterate  was  Joseph  at  that  time,  that  he 
didn't  even  know  that  Jerusalem  was  a  walled  city,  and  he  was  utterly  unable 
to  pronounce  many  of  the  names  which  the  magic  power  of  the  Urim  and 
Thummim  revealed,  and  therefore  spelled  them  out  in  syllables,  and  the  more 
erudite  scribe  put  them  together.  The  stone  was  the  game  used  by  the  Jare- 
dites  at  [from?]  Babel.  I  have  frequently  placed  it  to  my  eyes,  but  could  see 
nothing  through  it.  I  have  seen  Joseph,  however,  place  it  to  his  eyes  and 
instantly  read  signs  one  hundred  and  sixty  miles  distant,  and  tell  exactly  what 
was  transpiring  there.  When  I  went  to  Harmony  after  him,  he  told  me  the 
name  of  every  hotel  at  which  I  had  stopped  on  the  road,  read  the  signs,  and 


Joseph  Smith.  Defended.  71 

described  various  scenes  without  having  ever  received  any  information 
from  me." 

Of  "the  stone,"  or  "interpreters,"  Mr.  Whitmer  is  represented 
as  saying: 

%uBut  a  stone  had  been  found  with  the  plates,  shaped  like  a  pair  of  ordinary 
spectacles,  though  much  larger,  and  at  least  half  an  inch  in  thickness,  and  per- 
fectly opaque,  save  to  the  prophetic  vision  of  Joseph  Smith.  On  the  tablets  or 
plates  were  engraven  the  records  of  the  tribe  of  Nephites,  and  the  stone  wa& 
the  Urim  and  Thummim,  by  which  the  seers  of  old  had  deciphered  the  mysteries, 
of  the  universe." — Chicago  Times,  Aug.  7,  1875. 

Here  are  definite  testimonies,  by  0.  Cowdery  and  D.  Whitmer,. 
that  they  not  only  saw  the  plates,  but  also  the  Urim  and  Thurnminu 
If  they  and  Martin  Harris  omitted  mentioning  in  writing,  that  they 
saw  the  breast-plate,  sword  of  Laban  and  directors,  that  would  be  no- 
evidence  at  all  that  they  had  not  seen  them.  They  frequently  tes- 
tified, orally,  to  the  fact,  and  0.  Cowdery  and  D.  Whitmer,  have 
testified  freely  and  pointedly,  as  we  see,  in  writing,  that  they  saw 
the  Urim  and  Thummim,  or  "stone  interpreters." 

MR.  S.  THINKS  THE  PLATES  MAY  HAVE  BEEN 
COLORED  TIN! 

uPerhaps  they  saw  some  plates  which  might  have  been  tin,  colored  in  some' 
dye  that  would  give  them  a  golden  complexion,  to  those  not  familiar  with  that- 
metal;  they  might  have  heard  a  ventriloquist  affirm  they  were  translated  by 
divine  power,  or  they  might  merely  have  heard  the  voice  of  God  through  Joseph: 
they  testify  that  an  angel  came  down  from  heaven  and  brought  the  plates,  per- 
haps on  the  strength  of  Joseph's  statement,  for  they  do  not  affirm  that  they  saw  the 
angel ;  but  whether  they  saw  the  plates  thus  prepared  or  some  other  kind,  they 
failed  to  see  the  rest  of  the  furniture  promised.1'1 

The  latter  clause  is  a  groundless  assumption,  and  by  what  we  have 
already  seen  we  know  it  is  false;  and  by  the  testimony  of  many 
witnesses  now  living  we  know  the  conjectures  to  be  wholly  false,  as 
they  testified  to  seeing  "the  furniture  promised,"  as  Mr.  S.  is  pleased 
to  call  them.  As  for  their  seeing  "plates  which  might  have  been 
tin,  colored  in  some  dye  that  would  give  them  a  golden  complexion;" 
and  that  "they  might  have  heard  a  ventriloquist  affirm  they  were 
translated  by  divine  power;"  and  that  "they  might  merely  have 
heard  the  voice  of  God  through  Joseph;"  and,  further,  the  proba- 
bility that  "they  testify  on  the  strength  of  Joseph's  statement  that 
an  angel  came  down  from  heaven  and  brought  the  plates;"  and 
lastly,  that  "they  do  not  affirm  that  they  saiv  the  angel''  is  so  weak, 
so  preposterous  and  puerile,  and  so  false  to  the  written  record,  that 


72  ,  The  Divine  Calling  of 

we  should  not  consider  a  reply  called  for,  did  not  the  article  in  which 
it  appears  fill  a  large  space  in  the  leading  organ  of  the  society  of 
which  Mr.  S.  is  a  prominent  minister  and  champion. 

DOES  MR.  S.  THINK  THAT  COWDERY,  WHITMER,  AND  HARRIS 
WERE  IDIOTS? 

'  Mr.  Martin  Harris  was  aged  near  forty-five  years  at  the  time  of 
the  translation,  was  a  well-to-do  farmer,  and  a  sensible,  intelligent 
man,  and  an  honored  member  of  society.  Oliver  Cowdery  was  a 
school  teacher  before  he  began  to  write  the  translation  of  the  plates, 
and  was  a  highly  intellectual  man,  a  good  citizen,  and  possessed  a 
fair  education.  After  breaking  off  his  active  connection  with  the 
Church  he  practiced  law  at  Elkhorn,  Wis.,  after  which  he  went  to 
Missouri,  where  he  died  sometime  after  1847.  We  have  been  in- 
formed by  credible  witnesses  that  in  1846,  or  1847,  he  attended  a 
conference  at  Carterville,  a  hamlet  near  Council  Bluffs,  Iowa,  and 
was  there  re-baptized,  and  re-ordained  to  the  office  of  an  elder,  at 
which  time,  from  the  public  stand,  he  bore  testimony  to  the  truth 
of  the  Book  of  Mormon  and  the  prophetic  mission  of  Joseph  Smith. 
After  this  he  returned  to  Missouri,  soon  after  which  he  died.  He 
recognized  the  fact,  seemingly,  of  the  priesthood  being,  in  part,  with 
that  people  who  were  following  under  the  leadership  of  Brigham  and 
a  portion  of  the  Twelve,  though  he  did  not  endorse  that  leadership; 
and  he  also  felt  the  necessity  of  doing  his  "first  works"  over  again, 
before  passing  into  the  presence  of  that  God  whose  voice  he  had 
heard,  whose  Spirit  he  had  enjoyed,  and  in  whose  work  he  had  been 
for  many  years  actively  and  prominently  engaged.  While  in  the 
practice  of  law  at  Elkhorn,  many  of  the  Saints  questioned  him  in 
regard  to  his  former  testimonies  in  respect  to  the  Book  of  Mormon, 
Joseph,  and  the  Church,  and  he  constantly  affirmed  those  testimonies 
to  be  true.  Of  this  we  have  been  told  by  Brn.  Wm.  Aidrich,  John 
C.  Gaylord,  James  M.  Adams,  and  others.  As  for  David  Whitmer, 
he  still  lives,  and  his  reputation  for  intelligence  and  probity,  as  a 
man  among  men,  is  most  excellent.  Of  him  the  reporter  of  the 
Chicago  Times,  who  interviewed  him,  says: 

"He  is  now  seventy  years  of  age,  but  as  hale  and  hearty  as  most  men  of  fifty. 
In  person  he  is  above  the  medium  higlit,  stoutly  built  though  not  corpulent, 
his  shoulders  inclining  to  stoop  as  if  from  so  long  supporting  his  massive  head 
rather  than  from  the  weight  of  years;  his  frank,  manly,  and  benevolent  face 
closely  shaven,  and  his  whole  exterior  betokening  him  to  be  one  of  nature's 
gentlemen.  The  rudiments  of  education  he'Uearned  in  school,  and  a  life-time'of 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  73 

thought  and  research  have  served  to  expand  and  store  his  mind  with  a  vast 
fund  of  information.  The  Times  reporter  found  him  at  his  pleasant,  two-story, 
white  frame  residence,  near  the  centre  of  the  town  of  Richmond,  Mo.,  and  in 
company  with  Hon.  J.  T.  Child,  editor  of  the  Conservator,  was  admitted,  intro- 
duced, and  received  a  cordial  greeting.  "When  the  object  of  the  call  was  made 
known,  Mr.  Whitmer  smilingly  and  meditatively  remarked  that  it  was  true  he 
had  in  his  possession  the  original  records,  [manuscripts?],  and  was  conversant 
with  the  history  of  the  Church  of  Christ  from  the  beginning,  but  was  under 
sacred  obligations  to  hold  both  history  and  records  sacred  until  such  time  aa 
the  interests  of  truth  and  true  religion  might  demand  their  aid  to  combat  error. 
Presently  he  became  quite  animated,  arose  to  his  feet  and  with  great  earnest- 
ness and  good  nature  spoke  for  half  an  hour  on  the  harmony  between  the  Bible 
the  original  Book  of  Mormon,  showing  how  the  finding  of  the  plates  had  been, 
predicted,  referring  to  the  innumerable  evidences,  in  the  shape  of  ruins  of  great 
cities  existing  on  this  continent,  of  its  former  occupation  by  a  highly  civilized 
race,  reverently  declaring  his  solemn  conviction  of  the  authenticity  of  the  records 
in  his  possession,  and  closed  by  denouncing  the  Latter  Day  Saints  of  Utah  aa 
an  abomination  in  the  sight  of  the  Locd.  *  *  *  When  the  question  of  polyga- 
my was  broached,  and  it  was  asked  if  the  original  Book  of  Mormon  justified  the 
practice,  Mr.  Whitmer  most  emphatically  replied :  'No !  it  is  even  much  more 
antagonistic  to  both  polygamy  and  concubinage  than  is  the  BibJe.  Joseph 
Smith  never  to  my  knowledge  advocated  it,  though  I  have  heard  that  he  virtu- 
ally sanctioned  it  at  Nauvoo.  However,  as  I  cut  loose  from  him  in  1837, 1  can't 
speak  intelligently  of  what  transpired  thereafter.'  David  Whitmer  believes  in 
the  Bible  as  implicitly  as  any  devotee  alive;  and  he  believes  in  the  Book  of 
Mormon  as  much  as  he  does  in  the  Bible.  The  one  is  but  a  supplement  to  the 
other,  according  to  his  idea,  and  neither  would  be  complete  were  the  other 
lacking.  And  no  man  can  look  at  David  Whitmer's  face  for  a  half  hour,  while 
he  charily  and  modestly  speaks  of  what  he  has  seen,  and  then  boldly  and  earn- 
estly confesses  the  faith  that  is  in  him,  and  say  that  he  is  a  bigot  or  an  enthusi- 
ast. While  he  shrinks  from  unnecessary  public  promulgation  of  creed,  and  feels 
that  the  Brighamites  and  Danites  and  numerous  other  lites'  have  disgraced  it, 
yet  he  would  not  hesitate,  in  emergency  to  stake  his  honor  and  even  his  life 
upon  its  reliability.  *  *  *  Neither  does  he  believe  that  the  Book  of  Mormon 
is  the  only  record  of  the  lost  tribes  hidden  in  the  earth,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
that  the  caves  hold  other  records,  that  will  not  come  forth  till  all  is  peace,  and 
the  lion  shall  eat  straw  with  the  lamb.  Three  times  has  he  been  at  the  hill 
Cumorah  and  seen  the  casket  that  contained  the  tablets  and  the  seer-stone." — 
Chicago  Times,  Aug.  7,  1875. 

The  foregoing  description  of  Mr.  Whitmer  is  probably  correct,  as 
also  the  statement  of  his  testimony,  in  the  main. 

Now  we  ask,  Is  it  at  all  probable,  nay  is  it  possible,  for  these  three 
intelligent  men  to  have  been  deceived  in  regard  to  the  quality  of  the 
plates,  or  the  fact  of  seeing  the  angel  come  "down  from  heaven," 
bringing  the  plates  and  laying  them  before  their  eyes,  so  that  they 
"saw  the  plates  and  the  engravings  thereon ;"  and  the  further  fact 
that  they  were  shown  unto  them  "by  the  power  of  God  and  not  of 


74  The  Divine  Calling  of 

man,"  and  that  "the  voice  of  the  Lord  commanded"  them  that  they 
should  bear  record  of  it;  and,  finally,  that  the  voice  of  the  Lord 
declared  to  them  that  the  plates  had  "been  translated  by  the  gift  and 
power  of  God,"  all  of  which  is  set  forth  in  their  joint  testimony  in 
the  prefatory  pages  of  the  Book  of  Mormon?  Is  it  possible,  we 
again  inquire,  for  these  men  to  have  been  deceived  in  all  or  any  of 
these  things?  "We  think  all  right-minded  people  will  say,  No;  they 
saw  and  heard  what  they  testify  of,  or  they  were  vile  deceivers. 
The  dye  -  colored  -  tin  -  plate  -  ventriloquist  -  second  -  hand  -  testimony- 
"through-Joseph-Smith"  theory  is  as  foolish  as  it  is  false,  and  is  use- 
ful only  as  showing  to  what  absurd  extremes  some  men  will  go  in 
order  to  shield  themselves  and  their  theories  from  the  force  of  true, 
direct,  and  unimpeachable  testimony.  These  men  sai0,  and  heard, 
and  kneic,  when  in  the  full  vigor  of  life,  when  free  from  excitement, 
and  when  all  the  conditions  forbade  deception;  and  they  in  cool  and 
sober  moments  testify,  and  testify  the  same  things  all  their  lives, 
and  the  dying  go  down  to  their  graves  with  their  words  of  testimony 
on  their  lips,  while  the  living,  bending  under  the  weight  of  accumu- 
lated years,  boldly,  yet  meekly  and  joyfully,  affirm  the  truth  of  their 
former  testimony.  They  were  not  deceived. 

THE   NEW  JERUSALEM. 

Passing  over  one  or  two  unimportant  points,  and  the  trifling  re- 
marks of  Mr.  S.  concerning  them,  we  next  notice  his  effort  to  prove 
Joseph  Smith  a  false  prophet  because  the  New  Jerusalem  has  not  yet 
been  built.  He  says  : 

"Over  forty-two  years  ago  Joseph  Smith  prophesied  that  the  new  Jerusalem 
should  be  built  in  Western  Missouri,  and  that  the  temple  should  be  reared  in 
this  generation :  'Verily  this  is  the  word  of  the  Lord,  that  the  city  New  Jeru- 
salem shall  be  built  by  the  gathering  of  the  Saints,  beginning  at  this  place,  even 
the  place  of  the  temple,  which  temple  shall  be  reared  in  this  generation;  for 
verily  this  generation  shall  not  all  pass  away,  until  an  house  shall  be  built  unto 
the  Lord,  and  a  cloud  shall  rest  upon  it,  which  cloud  shall  be  even  the  glory  of 
the  Lord,  which  shall  fill  the  house.1 — D.  C.  83:  2.  This  revelation  was  given 
in  September,  1832,  over  forty -two  years  ago,  and  yet  there  is  no  sign  of  a  tem- 
ple in  Wrestern  Missouri;  and  not  a  trace  can  be  found  of  the  New  Jerusalem 
there;  so  the  prophecy  limiting  the  building  of  the  temple  to  'this  generation1  is 
a  failure." 

Not  exactly,  Mr.  S.  The  conclusion  to  which  you  jump  with 
such  eagerness  is  not  a  very  sensible  one,  and  does  great  injustice  to 
the  text.  The  text  says  "this  generation  shall  not  all  pass  away, 
until  an  house  shall  be  built,"  etc.  This  implies  that  the  most  or 


'  Joseph  Smitli  Defended.  75 

greater  part  of  it  would  pass  away;  i.  c.,  that  the  house  would  not  be 
built  until  the  dosing  times  of  this  generation.  The  word  "genera- 
tion," as  here  used,  plainly  signifies  the  life  or  age  of  man,  and  not 
the  average  age  of  man,  as  is  urged  by  Mr.  S.  The  Lord  said  to 
Abraham,  concerning  the  deliverance  of  his  posterity  from  Egypt  : 
"In  the  four}  h  generation  they  shall  come  hither  again."  —  Gen.  15:16. 
Now,  if  Mr.  S.  had  lived  in  the  times  of  Abraham,  and  had  reasoned 
as  he  now  does,  he  doubtless  would  have  said  that  the  above  revela- 
tion to  Abraham.  was  false,  because  Israel  did  not  "come  hither  again" 
in  just  four  of  his  generations  of  thirty  years  each  —  or  one  hundred 
and  twenty  years.  The  "fourth  generation"  from  the  time  of  prom- 
ise, measured,  as  we  see,  four  generation  of  almost  one  hundred  and 
eight  years  each. 

That  the  gathering  of  the  Saints  to  the  center  stake,  (Independ- 
ence, Mo.),  and  the  building  of  the  temple,  was  to  take  place  after 
many  years  from  the  giving  of  the  revelatien  in  question,  is  appar- 
ent from  another  revelation,  one  given  thirteen  months  before  the 
former  one;  it  reads: 

"Ye  can  not  behold  with  your  natural  eyes,  for  the  present  time,  the  design 
of  your  God  concerning  those  things  which  shall  come  hereafter,  and  the  glory 
which  shall  follow,  after  much  tribulation.  For  after  much  tribulation  cometh 
the  blessing.  "Wherefore  the  day  cometh  that  ye  shall  be  crowned  with  muc?i 
"—  D.  C  58:2. 


The  Church  has  been  passing  through  "much  tribulation"  ever 
since  the  times  in  which  the  foregoing  was  given,  but  especially 
since  November,  1833,  when  most  violent  persecutions  began-  to 
come  upon  them.  Men  were  whipped,  tarred  and  feathered,  impris- 
oned, brutally  beaten,  and  many  were  killed  at  different  periods  from 
1833  to  1845,  whilst  women  and  children  suffered  for  food  and  shel- 
ter, and  all  manner  of  indignities,  arid  even  death,  and  worse 
than  death.  Then  there  came  the  great  latter-day  "departing  from 
the  faith,  giving  heed  to  seducing  spirits  and  doctrines  of  devils, 
teaching  lies  in  hypocrisy,  having  their  conscience  seared  with  a  hot 
iron;"  and  this  has  caused  untold  and  immeasurable  "tribulation," 
and  the  end  is  not  yet.  It  was  not  until  after  all  this  that  the 
Saints  were  to  be  "crowned  with  much  glory,"  a  condition  of  things- 
that  can  be  fully  realized  only  in  the  final  restoration  and  gathering 
of  the  Saints,  and  the  building  up  of  Zion  and  the  temple  of  the 
Lord.  From  all  this  we  learn  that  the  speedy  building  up  of  "the 
center  stake"  and  "the  temple,  was  not  contemplated  in  the  re  vela- 


76  The  Divine  Calling  of 

tions  of  Joseph,  yet  "this  generation  shall  not  all  pass  away,  until  an 
house  shall  be  built  unto  the  Lord." 

MR.  S.  AS  A  MATHEMATICIAN. 

We  can  not  close  on  this  point  until  we  give  the  reader  a  speci- 
men both  of  the  profound  ekill  of  Mr.  S.  as  an  arithmetician,  and 
of  his  remarkable  zeal  in  pointing  out  the  errors(?)of  his  fellowmen. 
In  his  anxiety  to  make  out  his  case  he  undertakes,  in  a  very  elabor- 
ate manner,  to  enlighten  us  with  respect  to  "the  length  of  a  gener- 
ation in  Mormon  literature,"  and  he  says  "it  is  easily  learned."  His 
first  term  in  the  proposition  is : 

"His  [Moroni's]  word  shall  hiss  forth  from  generation  to  generation. 

That  is  after  the  Book  of  Mormon  came  forth.     His  next  is: 

"Joseph,  my  son,  if  thou  livest  till  'thou  art  eighty -five  years  old,  thou  shalt 
-see  the  face  of  the  Son  of  Man.11 

And  now  comes  his  statement : 

"As  Joseph  was  born  in  1-805,  his  eighty-fifth  year  would  be  in  1890,  when 
•Christ's  coming  is  due  according  to  this  revelation." 

And  now  his  conclusion : 

•"So  if  the  generations,  during  which  the  words  of  God  written  by  Moroni 
were  to  'hiss  forth,'  began  with  the  publication  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  in  1830, 
and  end  at  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  in  1890,  there  are  only  sixty  years 
given  for  two  generations,  and  only  thirty  years  for  one  generation ;  and  taking 
this  measurement  for  a  generation,  that  temple  should  have  been  built  over 
•twelve  years  ago." 

And  now  the  final  result: 

"The  truth  is,  the  prophecy  is  a  failure." 

There  are  too  many  ifs  in  this  proposition  to  make  it  even  inter- 
esting, to  say  nothing  about  its  inaccuracies.  Archimedes,  if  he 
possessed  the  needed  fulcrum,  could  have  raised  the  earth.  In  the 
:first  place,  it  is  not  strictly  authentic  with  the  Reorganized  Church 
that  Joseph  had  a  revelation  locating  the  time  of  the  coming  of  the 
Son  of  man.  We  do  not  admit  the  one  quoted  in  evidence,  as  it 
came  from  the  Brighamite  publications.  It  may  or  may  not  be 
-genuine.  In  the  next  place,  the  Book  of  Mormon  may  "hiss  forth" 
to  many  generations  after  Christ  comes,  and  no  doubt  will;  so  we 
are  not,  necessarily,  compelled  to  locate  the  "two  generations"  claimed 
by  Mr.  S.  on  this  side  of  his  coming.  And,  finally,  Mr.  S.  errs 
egregiously,  in  interpreting  the  promise,  "His  word  shall  hiss  forth 
ifrom  generation  to  generation."  If  his  words  "hiss  forth"  to  par- 


Joseph  Sniitli  Defended ..  Iff 

ents,  and  then  to  their  children,  it  fulfills  the  promise.  If  it  goes  to 
parents,  children,  grand-children,  and  great  grand-children,  then 
they  "hiss  forth  from  generation  to  generation"  just  as  truly,  only 
on  a  more  extended  scale. 

"I  the  Lord  thy  God  am  a  jealous  God,  visiting  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers- 
upon  the  children,  unto  the  third  and  fourth  generation  of  them  that  hate  me-."" — 
Ex.  20:5, 

In  this  passage  the  word  generation  is  used  to  convey  the  same 
idea  or  meaning  as  that  from  Moroni.  It  relates  to  successive  gen- 
erations of  posterity,  and  has  no  direct  reference  to  mere  periods  of 
time.  Mr.  S.  and  his  fellows  seem  very  partial  to  all  questions  of 
time,  and  mathematical  calculation;  but  their  past  history  admon- 
ishes us  that  they  are  not  always,  if  ever,  accurate,  and  therefore 
need  close  watching.  There  are  too  many  ifs  and  huts  in  their 
methods,  for  profit. 

BOOK  OF  LEHI. 

Mr.  S.  next  finds  fault  because  the  book  of  Lehi  was  not  pub- 
lished. He  quotes: — 

"The  Lord  God  hath  said,  that  the  words  of  the  faithful  should  speak  as  it 
were  from  the  dead.  Wherefore,  the  Lord  God  will  proceed  to  bring  forth  the 
words  of  the  book;  and  in  the  mouth  of  as  many  witnesses  as  seemeth  him 
good,  will  he  establish  his  word." — 2  Neplii  11:  17, 

"But  a  part  of  the  words,  (118  pages),  called  the  book  of  Lehi,"  [says  Mr.  SJr 
"were  never  published,  the  manuscript  having  been  stolen,  as  we  learn  from 
the  ninth  section  of  the  Book  of  Covenants." 

Yes,  they  were  stolen ;  we  learn  this  from  the  section  cited,  and 
also  from  the  lips  of  the  late  Martin  Harris,  Sen.  He  told  the 
writer,  in  1860,  all  about  the  leading  circumstances  connected  with 
the  theft.  Mr.  Harris,  by  much  persuasion,  obtained  them  from 
Joseph  in  order  to  read  to  his  wife,  and  to  some  very  pious  (?) 
friends  who  were  at  the  time  visiting  at  his  house,  whom  he  hoped 
to  benefit  by  showing  them  the  manuscript.  Before  retiring  for 
the  night  he  took  the  manuscript  and  put  it  in  a  bureau  drawer,  and 
locked  the  drawer ;  he  then  locked  the  parlor  in  which  the  bureau- 
was,  putting  both  keys  in  his  pocket.  This  was  the  last  he  ever 
saw  of  the  manuscript.  But  this  did  not  prevent  "the  words  of  the 
faithful"  Lehi  from  going  forth  in  the  Book  of  Mormon.  Let 
us  see: — 

"And  now,,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  that  an  account  of  those  things  that  you 
have  written,  which  have  gone  out  of  your  hands>are  engraven  upon  the  plates 


78  The  Divine  Calling  of 

of  Nephi.  Yea,  and  you  remember,  it  was  said  in  those  writings,  that  a  more 
particular  account  was  eiven  of  these  things  uoon  the  plates  of  Nephi." — D.  & 
C.  9:8. 

From  "the  plates  of  Nephi"  then,  we  get  not  only  what  was  in 
the  book  of  Lehi,  but  "a  more  particular  account."  Nephi's  plates 
contained  in  part,  "an  abridgement  of  the  record"  of  his  father, 
Lehi. — 1  Nephi  1  : 7.  Messrs.  Cowdery,  Harris,  D.  Whitmer,  and 
probably  others,  were  most  likely  knowing  to  the  fact,  from  obser- 
vation, that  the  writings  from  "the  plates  of  Nephi"  contained  "a 
more  particular  account"  of  those  matters  found  in  the  book  of  Lehi; 
so  there  was  no  possible  room  for  deception  on  that  score.  Mr.  S. 
inquires,  "Is  it  not  strange  that  inspiration  could  not  have  forseen 
all  this?"  (that  is  the  theft  of  the  manuscript).  And  we  may  with 
equal  propriety  inquire,  Was  it  not  strange  that  inspiration  could 
not  have  forseen  "the  loss  of  the  book  entitled  the  Common  Sal- 
vation?" (Jude  3);  and  of  the  many  gospels?  (Luke  1:1);  and 
of  the  prophecy  of  Enoch?  (Jude  14);  "the  book  of  Nathan  the 
prophet?"  and  "the  book  of  Gad  the  Seer?"  (1  Chron.  29:29), 
with  twenty-five  or  more  books,  either  cited  or  quoted  in  the  Bible, 
but  now  lost?  And  "Is  it  not  strange  that  inspiration  could  not 
"have  forseen"  that  King  Jehoiakim  would  burn  the  prophetic  roll 
of  Jeremiah  ?  (Jer.  36  :  23)  ;  or  that  the  Philistines  would  capture 
"the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  God?"  (1  Sam.  4  :  4,  11). 

THE  INSPIRED  TRANSLATION  AGAIN. 

Mr.  S.  affirms  that, 

"The  inspired  version  betrays  itself  in  first  rejecting  certain  names  given  in 
t)ur  version,  as  being  incorrect,  and  subsequently  adopting  the  same  names  as 
being  correct.  We  present  a  few  samples.  Our  version  of  Matt.  24: 37,  reads, 
'But  as  the  days  of  Noe  were,1  etc.;  but  Joseph's  inspired  version  repudiates 
Woe,'  and  substitutes  lXoah.' " 

We  have  before  said  that  much  of  the  "Inspired  Translation" 
was  simply  a  revision  and  correction  of  the  most  essential  parts  of 
the  text,  and  not  a  complete  translation  of  the  entire  Bible.  This 
may  account,  in  a  measure,  for  many  seeming  irregularities  in  both 
the  letter,  and  historical  statements,  of  the  Inspired  Translation. 
We  remark  again,  that  the  evident  object  in  giving  what  is  called 
the  Inspired  Translation,  was  to  relieve  the  Scriptures  of  gross  and 
harmful  errors,  whether  of  doctrine,  morals,  history,  etc.,  and  to 
restore  valuable  portions  that  had  been  taken  away.  Now,  as  for 
the  difference  in  spelling  a  name,  "Noe,"  or  "Noah;"  "Sion,"  or 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  79 

"Zion;"  "Jeremy,"  or  "Jeremiah/'  there  is  no  evidence  but  that 
< 'inspiration"  may  use  both  forms,  as  they  both  signify  precisely  the 
same  thing.  The  spirit  and  substance  of  a  matter  is  of  chief  im- 
portance. And  this  may  be  clearly  seen  in  the  quotations  of  Jesus 
and  the  apostles  from  the  various  prophets.  They  seldom  quote 
letter  for  letter,  but  mainly  the  substance ;  from  which  we  may  learn 
that  "inspiration"  is  concerned  most  entirely,  if  not  quite,  about  the 
sense  and  meaning,  and  application  of  things.  Again,  says  Mr.  S : 

"The  inspired  translation,  is  made  to  address  Joseph  thousands  of  years 
before  he  was  born,  in  the  following  two  verses :  'These  are  the  words  which 
I  spake  unto  my  servant  Moses.  And  they  are  true  even  as  I  will.  And  I 
have  spoken  them  unto  you.  See  thou  show  them  unto  no  man,  until  I  com- 
mand you,  except  they  that  believe.' — Gen.  3: 32,  33." 

This  statement  is  utterly  untrue.  All  of  the  words  quoted  are  in 
parenthesi*,  at  the  close  of  a  chapter,  and  were  given  to  Joseph  in 
explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  preceding  revelation,  and  are  words 
of  instruction  to  Joseph.  If  Mr.  S.  had  put  them  in  parenthesis, 
as  he  found  them,  he  would  only  have  done  his  bounden  duty.  To 
leave  out  the  parenthesis  in  his  quotation,  is  just  as  vicious  as  to 
have  mutilated  the  text  by  leaving  out  or  adding  words.  It  is  a 
gross  perversion,  and  utterly  beneath  a  fair-dealing  controversialist. 
Mr.  S.  says:  "This  putting  two  verses  into  the  book  of  Genesis  ad- 
dressed to  Joseph  was  certainly  a  wonderful  blunder  on  his  part." 
But  they  were  not  intended  as  a  part,  neither  are  they  a  part  of 
the  narrative  of  the  Book  of  Genesis.  We  find  in  John  7  :  39,  and 
Acts  22  :  2,  that  John  and  Luke  introduce,  in  parenthesis,  expla- 
nations touching  the  teachings  of  Jesus;  and  Paul,  in  a  similar 
manner  as  Joseph,  in  the  verses  in  question,  introduces  an  explana- 
tion respecting  the  revelation  to  Moses.  The  cases  are  exactly 
parallel.  And,  by  the  way,  those  two  verses  are  of  great  value,  as 
settling  the  authorship  of  Genesis,  and  the  perplexing  question  as 
to  how  Moses,  if  he  wrote  the  book,  (which  some  question),  obtained 
the  information  contained  therein,  especially  that  which  relates  to 
the  creation,  the  fall  of  man,  and  other  kindred  matters.  Some 
think  that  as  "Moses  was  learned  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyp- 
tians," and  probably  had  access  to  the  ancient  documents  in  the 
archives  of  the  priesthood,  he,  by  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  was 
enabled  to  collate  important  facts,  and  make  such  extracts  as  were 
essential,  and  that  he  embodied  them  in  what  is  now  the  book  of 
Genesis. 


80  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"Ewald,  the  keenest  of  critics,  and  the  most  learned  of  skeptics,  concerning  the 
authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole,  does  not  hesitate  to  ascribe  to  Moses 
the  tables  of  the  law,  and  the  substantial  groundwork  of  the  system  that  bears 
his  name." — Genesis  and  Geology,  by  Prof.  Thompson,  D.  D.,  LL.  D. 

Yet  Professor  Thompson  thinks  that  Genesis  was  made  up, 
largely,  of  oral  traditions  and  written  documents,  and  further  says: 

"The  composer  of  Genesis,  as  we  possess  it,  may  have  worked  up  materials 
already  extant  in  the  form  either  of  oral  traditions  or  of  written  documents  be- 
fore him." 

Yet  he  believes  that  those  portions  relating  to  the  creation  were 
in  a  direct  manner  displayed  by  God  to  man.  He  writes : 

"A  probable  conjecture  is,  that  what  here  is  given  in  narrative  passed  before 
the  mind  of  the  original  narrator  in  a  series  of  retrospective  visions ;  that  it  was 
a  panoramic  optical  presentation,  as,  in  a  prophetic  vision,  future  events  are  made 
to  pass  before  the  mind  in  a  scenic  form." 

But  he  does  not  claim  that  Moses  had  this  vision.  Smith,  in  his 
Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  Art.  Pentateuch,  says: 

""We  can  hardly  escape  the  conviction  that  it  [Genesis]  partakes  of  the  na- 
ture of  a  compilation.  It  has  indeed  a  unity  of  plan,  a  coherence  of  parts,  a 
shapeliness  and  an  order,  which  satisfy  us  that  as  it  stands  it  is  the  creation 
of  a  single  mind.  But  it  bears  also  manifest  traces  of  having  been  based  upon 
an  earlier  work ;  and  that  earlier  work  itself  seems  to  have  had  embedded  in  it 
fragments  of  still  more  ancient  documents.  *  *  *  The  history  contained  in 
Genesis  could  not  have  been  narrated  by  Moses  from  personal  knowledge;  but 
whether  he  was  taught  it  by  immediate  divine  suggestionr  or  was  directed  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  the  use  of  earlier  documents,  is  immaterial  in  reference  to  the 
inspiration  of  the  work." 

These  quotations  may  serve  to  illustrate  the  mystery  and  uncer- 
tainty among  learned  men,  as  to  who  wrote  the  Book  of  Genesis; 
and  as  to  whether,  if  Moses  wrote  it  at  all,  he  wrote  the  whole  or 
any  part  of  it  by  revelation  direct  from  God.  Now,  the  verses  in 
question  decide  this  important  matter,  when  it  is  said,  "These  are 
the  words  which  I  spake  unto  my  servant  Moses/' 

BAPTISM  UNDER  THE  LAW. 

Mr.  S.  continues: 

"In  the  Book  Mormon,  baptism  is  enjoined  in  connection  with  the  law  of 
Moses,  and  numerous  instances  are  recorded  where  it  is  said  to  have  been  ad- 
ministered. 

He  points  to  this  as  proof  that  Joseph  Smith  was  not  inspired  of 
God,  and  that  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  not  a  divine  record.  This 
mode  of  reasoning  would  condemn  the  four  gospels,  for  each  of  them 
informs  us  of  the  administration  of  baptism  by  John  the  Baptist, 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  81 

and  by  Christ  and  his  disciples,  for  some  years  before  the  abrogation 
of  the  law.  Such  logic  would  impeach  the  divine  mission  of  Jesus 
and  John  the  Baptist.  If  baptism  could  be  administered  in  Judea 
for  many  years  in  connection  with  the  law,  and  by  those  who  were 
so  very  exact  in  keeping  the  law  as  was  John  and  Jesus,  and  the 
Jewish  disciples,  then  it  might  be  administered  by  a  branch  of  Israel 
in  America,  under  similar  circumstances.  It  was  not  "a  requirement 
under  the  law,"  as  Mr.  S.  would  claim  that  the  Book  of  Mormon 
teaches,  but  it  was  a  requirement  superior  to  the  law,  as  is  taught  in 
the  Book  of  Mormon,  and  as  is  seen  in  the  ease  of  Jesus,  John,  and 
their  disciples.  That  baptism  was  an  ancient  rite  among  many  dif- 
ferent nations  is  now  generally  conceded.  Smith,  in  his  Diet.  Bible, 
Art.  Baptism,  says: 

"It  is  well  known  that  ablution,  or  bathing,  was  commoni  n  ancient  countries 
as  a  preparation  for  prayers  and  sacrifices,  or  as  expiatory  of  sin.  *  *  *  There 
is  an  universal  agreement  among  later  Jewish  writers  that  all  the  Israelites  were 
brought  into  covenant  with  God  by  circumcision,  baptism,  and  sacrifice,  and  that 
the  same  ceremonies  were  necessary  in  admitting  proselytes.  These  usages  of 
the  Jews  will  account  for  the  readiness  with  which  all  men  flocked  to  the  bap- 
tism of  John  the  Baptist." 

By  this  we  learn,  what  we  have  hitherto  remarked,  that  baptism 
was  not  new  and  peculiar  to  the  times  of  John,  Jesus,  and  the  prim- 
itive Christians,  but  was  an  ordinance  dating  back  to  a  very  earlj 
antiquity. 

BAPTISM  OF  CHILDREN. 

And  now  comes  an  effort  of  Mr.  S.  which  exhibits  most  clearly, 
intentional  perversity.  We  regret  it  deeply,  as  it  is  a  most  unpleas- 
ant thing  to  think  that  any  person  would  purposely  misrepresent 
the  views  and  statements  of  others.  He  says : 

"The  Book  of  Mormon  clashes  with  Joseph's  revelation  concerning  the  bap- 
tism of  children.  In  the  eighth  chapter  of  Moroni  we  find  the  following  re- 
marks :  'For  I  have  learned  the  truth,  that  there  have  been  disputations  among 
you  concerning  the  baptism  of  your  little  children.  And  now,  my  son,  I  desire 
that  you  should  labor  diligently,  that  this  gross  error  should  be  removed  from 
among  you.'  Again :  'I  know  that  it  is  solemn  mockery  before  God  that  ye 
should  baptize  little  children.1  And  again :  lHe  that  saith  little  children  need 
baptism,  denieth  the  mercies  of  Christ,  and  setteth  at  naught  the  atonement.' 
Yet  on  page  page  225  of  the  Book  of  Covenants,  Joseph  thus  speaks  of  John 
the  Baptist:  Tor  he  was  baptized  while  he  was  yet  in  his  childhood,  and  was  or- 
dained by  the  angel  of  God  at  the  time  he  was  eight  days  old.' " 

Mr.  S.  knows  that  "childhood"  has  its  different  stages,  and 
reaches  up  as  high  as  twelve  or  fifteen  years.  He  furthermore 


82  The  Divine  Calling  of 

knows  that  the  interdictory  texts  from  Moroni  relate  to  ''little  chil- 
dren/' and  not  to  children  of  advanced  age,  for  the  texts  road  so,  liter- 
ally. And  he  also  knows  that  the  text,  "For  he  was  baptized  while 
he  was  yet  in  his  childhood/'  implies  that  he  was  in  the  advanced 
stages  of  his  childhood,  bordering  upon  that  period  denominated 
youth.  His  quotation  from  "Apostle  Pratt/'  that  "baptism  always 
precedes  ordination/'  is  not  legitimate  in  his  effort  to  make  the  Book 
of  Mormon  and  the  revelations  of  Joseph  "clash."  That  quotation 
has  nothing  to  do  with  the  texts  which  he  falsely  claims  are  contra- 
dictory, and  he  is  aware  of  it. 

Ishmael  was  a  "child"  when  he  was  fourteen  years  old,  Gen.  21 : 
14;  Samuel  was  a  "child"  when  he  was  old  enough  to  minister  be- 
fore the  Lord,  1  Sam.  2:18;  Jesus  was  a  little  child,  or  "young 
child/'  at  his  birth,  Matt.  2  : 11,  18;  and  he  was  still  a  "child" 
when  twelve  years  old,  Luke  2  : 40, 42.  It  was  "little  children"  those 
who  were  not  capable  of  believing  intelligently  on  Christ,  and  of  re- 
penting of  actual  sins,  that  Mormon  was  writing  about  to  Moroni, 
and  Mr.  S.  was  not  ignorant  of  the  fact.  As  for  the  early  ordina- 
tion of  John  the  Baptist,  that  of  Jeremiah  was  at  a  still  younger  age : 

•"Before  thou  earnest  forth  out  of  the  womb  I  sanctified  thee,  and  I  ordained 
thee  a  prophet  unto  the  nations." — Jer.  1: 5. 

PRINTING  HOUSE. 

He  next  denounces  the  revelations  of  Joseph  as  spurious,  because 
a  commandment  to  build  a  printing  house  at  Kirtland,  0.,  for  the 
printing  of  the  Scriptures  was  not  accomplished,  and  because  the 
Inspired  Translation  was  "published  at  Piano,  111.,"  instead  of  at 
Kirtland,  and  in  the  house  spoken  of.  If  a  failure  on  the  part  of 
men  to  keep  a  commandment  was  proof  that  the  command  was  not 
of  God,  then  farewell  to  the  Bible — both  Old  and  New  Testaments — 
farewell  to  the  inspiration  of  Jesus,  and  Moses,  and  all  the  prophets 
and  apostles;  for,  from  Adam  and  Eve  in  Eden,  to  John  upon  Pat- 
mos,  commandments  have  been  received  from  God  and  not  kept; 
and  the  fact  is  so  patent  to  all  Bible  readers  that  quotations,  or  even 
citations,  in  proof,  are  not  needed.  The  history  of  the  race  is  the 
history  of  man's  disobedience  to  the  commands  of  God.  If  it  was 
not  manifest  that  our  critic  was  crafty,  we  might  think  him  crazy. 

WORD  "MORMON." 

He  next  complains  that  Joseph  did  not  "study  and  learn,  and  be- 
come acquainted  with  all  good  books,  and  with  languages,  tongues, 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  83 

and  people,"  as  he  was  commanded  to  do,  D.  C.  87  :  5.  And  he 
does  not  approve  of  Joseph's  analysis  of  the  word  Mormon,  and  of 
his  statement  that  in  its  root-meaning  it  signifies  "more  good/'  Well, 
from  the  manner  in  which  Mr.  S.  handles  the  English,  his  mother- 
tongue,  it  would  hardly  be  safe  to  accept  him  as  a  competent  critic, 
nor  his  opinions  as  proper  criterions.  Mr.  Smith  studied  the  Eng- 
lish branches,  especially  grammar,  under  Dr.  McLellin,  after  the 
date  of  this  revelation,  March,  1833,  with  remarkable  success,  as 
the  writer  had  it  from  Mr.  McLellin  in  1873.  He  afterwards  stud- 
ied Hebrew,  making  wonderful  proficiency,  under  Messrs.  Peixotto 
and  Noah.  He  likewise  studied  other  languages  with  some  success. 
He  also  studied  history,  etc.,  etc.  But  suppose  he  studied  none  of 
the  above,  that  would  not  prove  the  revelation  commanding  him  to 
study,  false,  as  any  one  of  fair  common  sense  may  see.  As  to  whether 
Mr.  Smith's  explanation  of  the  word  Mormon  is  good  or  not,  the 
matter  lies  so  far  above  the  reach  of  Mr.  S.  that  we  may  not  trouble 
ourselves  in  regard  to  his  opinion  about  it  for  at  least  one  millenium. 

APOCRYPHA. 

Again  says  Mr.  S.: 

t;In  March,  1833,  a  revelation  was  given  to  Joseph,  assigning  reasons  why  he 
need  not  translate  the  Apocrypha,  which  reasons  render  his  translation  of  the 
Bible  equally  needless.  lYerily,  thus  saith  the  Lord  unto  you,  concerning  the 
Apocrypha,  there  are  many  things  contained  therein  that  are  true,  and  it  is 
mostly  translated  correctly;  there  are  many  things  contained  therein  that  are 
not  true,  which  are  interpolations  by  the  hands  of  men.  Verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
that  it  is  not  needful  that  the  Apocrypha  should  be  translated.  Therefore, 
whoso  readeth  it  let  him  -understand,  for  the  Spirit  manifesteth  truth,  and  whoso 
is  enlightened  by  the  Spirit  shall  obtain  benefit  therefrom ;  and  whoso  receiveth 
not  the  Spirit  cannot  be  bene&tted;  therefore  it  is  not  needful  that  it  should  be 
translated.' — D.  C.  88: 1.  If  the  possession  of  the  Spirit  will  lead  to  a  discrim- 
ination between  truth  and  error  in  the  Apocrypha,  so  that  a  translation  is  need- 
less, the  same  would  be  true  with  the  Bible,  and  consequently  render  Joseph's 
work  in  translating  it  needless." 

That  the  Spirit  of  God  will  enable  its  possessor  to  judge  between 
good  and  evil,  truth  and  error,  is  just  as  true  as  the  words  of  Jesus 
and  theJApostles.— Heb.  10 :15;  John  14 : 26;  16  : 13;  and  1  Cor. 
2  : 15.  "He  that  is  spiritual  judgeth  all  things/'  But  there  is  this 
notable  difference  between  the  Apocrypha  and  the  Bible :  the  latter 
is  "Holy  Scriptures"  while  the  former  is  not;  and  not  being  so, 
although  it  contained  many  truths  which  might  be  gleaned  out  from 
its  errors  by  the  spiritually  minded,  there  was  no  need  of  its  trans- 
lation. The  revelation  under  consideration  does  aot  even  intimate 


84  The  Divine  Calling  of 

that  the  Apocrypha  was  in  any  sense  Holy  Scriptures  but  only  that 
it  contained  many  truths  and  many  errors;  and  they  were  of  no  vital 
importance  beyond  what  may  be  found  in  Joseph  us,  Philo,  or  sim- 
ilar works. 

JOSEPH  VS.  HIS  TRANSLATION  (?) 

Mr.  S.  says: 

"Joseph  had  no  faith  in  his  own  translation,  unless  he  was  a  dishonest  man, 
for  our  version  of  Heb.  11 : 40,  which  reads,  'That  they  without  us  should  not 
be  made  perfect,'  is  rendered  by  Joseph's  version  thus :  'Without  suffering  they 
should  not  be  made  perfect.'  Yet  nine  years  after  finishing  this  translation, 
Joseph  falls  back  on  to  the  common  version  to  prove  baptism  for  the  dead  in 
these  words :  Tor  their  salvation  is  necessary  and  essential  to  our  salvation,  as 
Paul  says  concerning  the  fathers,'  'that  they  without  us  cannot  be  made  perfect ; 
neither  can  we  without  our  dead  be  made  perfect.' — D.  C.  110: 15.  If  Joseph 
was  an  honest  man,  he  never  would  have  quoted  spurious  scripture  to  prove  any 
doctrine." 

To  this  we  reply,  (1)  that  the  Inspired  Translation  was  not  yet 
published,  and  was  not  in  common  use;  hence  the  propriety  of  not 
quoting  it  in  discussing,  popularly,  any  doctrine.  And,  (2)  Joseph 
quotes  the  passage,  (Heb.  11  :  40),  not  because  baptism  for  the 
dead  was  in  fulfillment  of  it,  but  because  the  idea,  or  principle, 
embraced  in  those  words  fitly  applied  in  illustrating  his  argument. 
Paul,  when  at  Athens  (Acts  17  :  28)  quoted  the  Greek  poet,  Aratus, 
not  because  the  quotation  was  genuine  Holy  Scripture,  but  because 
the  ideas  embraced  in  it  were  true,  as  Paul  used  it,  and  suitable  to 
the  occasion;  so  with  Joseph,  and  neither  were  dishonest.  And, 
lastly,  the  passage,  though  improperly  translated,  was  not  spurious. 
Coin  issued  at  the  United  States  Mint,  though  it  contain  more  alloy 
than  is  legal,  yet  it  is  not  spurious.  A  legal  document,  whether 
deed,  bond,  mortgage,  bill  of  sale,  license,  power  of  attorney  or  what- 
ever it  may  be,  if  it  le  improperly  worded,  yet  it  is  not,  therefore, 
spurious.  That  which  is  spurious  is  counterfeit,  illegitimate,  not  of 
genuine  origin,  intentionally  false  or  corrupt. 

INTERPRETERS. 

Mr.  S.  has,  for  the  want  of  a  better  subject,  taken  another  bout 
at  the  -interpreters."  He  would  like  to  make  the  Book  of  Mormon 
cross  itself  in  its  history  of  their  origin  or  transmission.  But  this 
he  cannot  do.  He  says: 

"Joseph  tells  us  that  the  stone -interpreters,  which  he  claims  to  have  found, 
'were  given  to  the  brother  of  Jared;'  (D.  C.  15: 1);  and  Moroni,  who  claims  to 
have  found  the  same  interpreters,  says  in  the  first  chapter  of  Ether,  'I  have  sealed 


Joseph  Smith.  Defended.  85 

•up  the  interpreters,'  that  is  with  the  plates.  So  far  they  agree;  but  upon  ex- 
amining the  Book  of  Mormon  we  find  that  Mosiah's  stone-interpreters  are  the 
ones  handed  down  with  the  records,  and  not  those  given  to  Jared's  brother." 

We  have  shown,  hitherto,  that  all  the  probabilities  favor  the  idea 
that  the  interpreters  with  which  Mosiah  translated  the  "twenty-four 
plates  found  by  the  people  of  Limhi,"  were  found  with  the  plates; 
for,  though  the  record  is  silent,  directly,  as  to  the  finding  the  inter- 
preters with  the  plates,  yet  the  stone-interpreters  are  first  mentioned 
after  finding  the  plates,  and  in  immediate  connection  with  the  transla- 
tion, "by  means  of  those  two  stones  which  were  fastened  into  the  two 
rims  of  a  bow/' — Mosiah  12  : 3.  The  silence  of  the  record  as  to  find- 
ing the  interpreters  with  the  plates,  directly,  is  no  evidence  at  all 
against  their  having  been  found  with  them.  The  silence  of  Mat- 
thew, Luke,  and  John  as  to  Jesus  saying,  "these  signs  shall  follow 
them  that  believe,"  is  no  evidence  that  he  did  not  say  so;  and  the 
silence  of  Matthew,  Mark  and  John  is  no  proof  that  Jesus  did  not 
say  to  the  penitent  thief,  "To-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise." 
So  the  silence  of  Mosiah  as  to  finding  the  "interpreters"  with  the 
plates,  is  not  evidence  that  they  were  not  found  with  them.  Joseph 
testifies  that  the  angel  told  him  that  with  the  plates  "there  were 
two  stones  in  silver  bows."  (//). 

David  Whitmer,  one  of  the  three  witnesses  to  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon, now  living  at  Richmond,  Mo.,  described  the  "interpreters''  to 
a  Chicago  Times  reporter,  in  August,  1875,  as  follows : 

"But  a  stone  had  been  found  with  the  plates,  shaped  like  a  pair  of  ordinary 
spectacles,  though  much  larger,  and  at  least  half  an  inch  in  thickness,  and  per- 
fectly opaque  save  to  the  prophetic  vision  of  Joseph  Smith." 

0.  Cowdery  testifies  that  Joseph  translated  the  plates  by  means 
of  "the  Urim  and  Thummim,  or,  as  the  Nephites  would  have  said, 
'interpreters.'"  (7i).  Now  all  these  testimonies  are  substantially  the 

same,  and  fix  the  identity  of  the  "interpreters,"  or  "two  stones  which 
were  fastened  into  the  two  rims  of  a  bow,"  (Mosiah  12  :  3)  as  being 
the  same  as  the  two  stones  (Ether  1  : 18,  11)  given  to  the  brother 
of  Jared.  We  have  shown  in  another  place  the  possibility  of 
Mosiah's  having  obtained  the  stone  interpreters  by  the  way  of  Cor- 
iantumr,  the  last  Jaredite  king,  or  in  connection  with  other  im- 
portant discoveries,  (among  them  Jaredite  engravings),  made  by 
the  people  of  Zarahemla,  (Omni  1:9,  10),  many  years  before  the 

(g)  Times  and  Seasons;  Mil.  Star;  also  Pearl  of  Great  Price,  41. 
(A)  Times  and  Seasons,  page  201. 


86  The  Divine  Calling  of 

times  of  Mosiah  2d.  Here  are  two  valid  solutions  of  the  question 
as  to  how  Mosiah  became  possessed  of  the  ;>'two  stones" — "interpre- 
ters"— given  to  the  brother  of  Jared.  And  he  might  have  obtained 
them  in  either  of  these  ways. 

Mr.  S.,  by  a  technical  criticism,  strives  to  make  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon say  that  the  "interpreters"  of  Mosiah  were  handed  down  from 
Jerusalem.  He  says,  '-Mosiah  conferred  his  interpreters  upon  Alma, 
together  with  the  plates:" 

t:Xow  after  Mosiah  bad  finished  translating  these  records  *  *  *  he  took  the 
plates  of  brass,  and  all  the  things  he  had  kept,  and  conferred  them  upon  Alma, 
who  was  the  son  of  Alma;  yea,  all  the  records,  and  also  the  interpreters,  and 
conferred  them  upon  him,  and  commanded  him  that  he  should  keep  and  preserve 
them,  and  also  a  record  of  the  people,  handing  them  dowu  from  one  generation 
to  another,  even  as  they  had  been  handed  down/Vom  the  time  Lelii  left  Jerusa- 
lem."— Mosiah  13:1. 

Now,  the  chief  object  in  this  passage  is  that  of  "the  records;" 
and  it  is  of  these,  and  not,  necessarily,  of  the  interpreters  that  Mo- 
siah speaks,  when  he  says,  <:as  fAryhad  been  handed  down/row?  the 
time  LeJii  left  Jerusol .-m." 

"And  these  records  [thus  handed  down]  did  contain  the  five  books  of  Moses, 
which  gave  an  account  of  the  creation  of  the  world,  and  also  of  Adam  and  Eve, 
who  were  our  first  parents;  and  also  a  record  of  the  Jews  from  the  beginning, 
even  down  to  the  commencement  of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah  king  of  Judah;  and 
also  the  prophecies  of  the  holy  prophets  from  the  beginning,  even  down  to  the 
commencement  of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah;  and  also  many  prophecies  which 
have  been  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah." — 1  Xephi  1 :  46. 

To  these  were  added  the  records  of  succeeding  Nephite  prophets, 
and,  finally,  in  the  times  of  Mosiah  2nd,  the  "twenty-four  plates" 
found  by  the  people  of  king  Limhi.  It  is  manifestly  the  records 
that  Mosiah  alludes  to  as  having  <;been  handed  down //0m  the  tune 
that  Laid  left  Jerusalem"  This  is  evidently  the  sense  and  intention 
of  the  passage.  Our  common  version  says : 

"Joseph  also  went  up  from  Galilee,  out  of  the  city  of  Nazareth,  into  Judea, 
unto  the  city  of  David,  which  is  called  Bethlehem,  *  *  to  be  taxed  with  Mary 
his  wife,  being  great  with  child.'1 — Luke  2:4.  5. 

Yet  none  would  question  but  what  it  was  intended  to  say  that 
it  was  Mary,  and  NOT  Joseph  who  was  "great  with  child."  It  also 
says: 

"But  as  they  [the  disciples]  sailed,  he  [Christ]  fell  asleep;  and  there  came 

down  a  storm  of  wind  on  the  lake,  and  they  were  filled  with  water" — Luke  8:23. 

Though  there  are  verbal  defects  in  these  passages,  the  meaning  of 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  87 

them  is  quite  apparent;  and  yet  they  afford  ample  grounds  for  a 
crafty  critic  to  build  up  a  flimsy  argument  upon. 

FEET  WASHING. 

Mr.  S.  says : 

"Feet  washing  is  pronounced  an  ordinance,  and  restricted  to  the  priesthood, 
(D.  C.  85:45,  46).  We  will  not  argue  the  question  as  to  whether  feet  washing 
was  ever  an  ordinance  in  the  church,  or  not;  but  it  certainly  was  not  restricted 
to  the  ministry  in  its  administration,  if  Paul's  testimony  has  any  weight:  'If  she 
has  washed  the  saints1  feet.1 " 

Oh,  no!  feet  washing  "was  not  restricted  to  the  ministry  in  its 
administration,"  not  by  any  means;  and  it  is  good  that  it  is  not. 
Persons  could  wash  their  own  feet;  and  both  men  and  women  could 
"wash  the  saints1  feet/'  But  feet  washing  as  an  "ordinance"  that 
of  which  the  Doctrine  and  Covenants  speaks,  is  a  very  different 
thing.  Partaking  of  bread  and  wine,  anointing  with  oil,  and  being 
immersed,  are  "not  restricted  to  the  ministry"  in  their  administra- 
tion, except  when  used  as  ordinances  of  the  Church,  and  then,  like 
feet  washing,  ilinj  are.  Feet  washing  was  appointed  to  his  ministry 
by  the  Savior,  (John  13:4-15). 

PRIESTHOOD  COVENANT. 

Mr.  S.  says : 

uThe  breaking  of  the  priesthood  covenant  is  pronounced  an  unpardonable 
sin:  'But  whoso  breaketh  this  covenant,  after  he  hath  received  it,  and  altogether 
turneth  therefrom  shall  not  have  forgiveness  of  sins  in  this  world  nor  in  the- 
world  to  come.1  (D.  C.  83 :  G).  Covenant-breaking  is  poor  business,  if  the  cove- 
nant is  a  good  one;  but  Christ  restricts  the  unpardonable  sin  to  one  thing — 
blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  After  Peter  had  lied,  and  cursed,  and 
swore,  and  had  thus  broken  his  ministerial  covenant,  he  found  pardon,  and  sub- 
sequently spent  long  years  in  the  ministry.1' 

That  Peter  sinned,  and  sinned  greviously,  none  can  deny;  but  to 
vsay  that  he  broke  his  priesthood  covenant,  is  to  say  what  is  evident- 
ly not  true.  If  he  had  broken  that  covenant,  and  "altogether"  turned 
"away  therefrom,"  his  case  would  have  been  vastly  different.  That 
would  have  involved  his  knowingly,  willingly,  and  willfully  turning 
away  from  God;  which  would  have  embraced,  substantially,  his  sin- 
ning against  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  is  he  who  not  only  breaks  "this 
covenant  after  he  hath  received  it,"  but  also  "altogether  turneth 
therefrom,"  "that  shall  not  have  forgiveness  of  sins  in  this  world  nor 
in  the  world  to  come."  Mr.  S.  has  a  peculiar  faculty  of  cutting  a 
sentence  in  two,  as  above,  and  then  arguing  against  a  detached  and 
incomplete  part,  j 


88  The  Divine  Calling  of 

ST.  JOHN  TO  TARRY. 

He  next  finds  fault  with  the  revelations  of  Joseph,  because  it 
is  claimed  that  Christ  said  unto  John :  "Thou  shalt  tarry  until  I  come 
in  my  glory,  and  shall  prophesy  bofore  many  nations,  kindreds, 
tongues,  and  people." — D.  &  C.  6  : 1.  Mr.  S.  says: 

"History  affirms  that  John  died  at  Ephesus.  But  if  history  is  false,  as  John 
never  disguised  himself  when  alive,  why  does  he  not  come  out  like  a  man  and 
show  himself,  and  settle  some  of  these  theological  disputes  in  the  land,  and  also 
let  us  know  whether  he  helped  ordain  Joseph?  Why  sneak  around  in  this  way?" 

If  Mr.  S.  had  lived  in  the  days  of  the  first  Christian  disciples,  he 
probably  would  have  reasoned  in  a  similar  strain  concerning  Jesus. 
The  Pharisees  of  those  times  said,  "Master,  we  would  see  a  sign  from 
thee,"  (Matt.  12 : 38);  and  some  said,  "If  he  be  the  king  of  Israel, 
let  him  now  come  down  from  the  cross,  and  we  will  believe  him," 
(Matt.  27 : 42).  And  no  doubt  many  said,  If  Jesus  is  actually 
risen  from  the  dead,  why  does  he  not  come  out  like  a  man  and  show 
himself,  and  settle  some  of  these  theological  disputes  in  the  land, 
and  also  let  us  know  whether  he  had  raised  up  many  of  the 
bodies  of  the  saints, — why  skulk  around  in  this  way?  The  heav- 
ens were  not  bound  to  gratify  the  morbid  curiosity  of  the  sign-seek- 
ers in  those  days,  nor  are  they  now.  Jesus  was  not  shown  openly 
to  the  world  after  his  resurrection,  "but  unto  witnesses  chosen  before 
of  God,"  (Acts  10:41).  God's  wisdom,  anciently,  and  inodernly, 
is  very  different  from  that  of  man's. 

As  to  John's  death,  history  is  conflicting  and  unsatisfactory. 
Smith,  in  his  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  says : 

"The  very  time  of  his  death  lies  within  the  region  of  conjecture  rather  than 
of  history,  and  the  dates  that  have  been  assigned  for  it  range  from  A.  D.  89  to 
A.  D.  120." 

That  the  early  Christians,  with  John,  understood  that  he  was  not 
to  die,  but  remain  till  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  is  apparent  from 
John  21:  22,  23: 

"Jesus  saith  unto  him,  If  I  will  .that  he  tarry  till  I  come,  what  is  that  to  thee  ? 
Follow  thou  me.  Then  went  this  saying  abroad  among  the  brethren,  that  that 
disciple  should  not  die;  yet  Jesus  said  not  unto  him,  He  shall  not  die;  but,  If  I 
will  that  he  tarry  till  I  come  what  is  that  to  thee  ?" 

ADAM — MICHAEL  AN  ANGEL. 

Mr.  S.  objects  further  to  the  revelations  of  Joseph,  because  one, 
in  D.  C.  104  :  28,  calls  Adam  "Michael,  the  Prince,  the  Archangel." 
He  says : 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  89 

uThe  Bible  never  represents  saints  as  turning  into  angels  at  any  past  or  future 
time." 

Well,  the  Bible  does  not  contain  all  the  truths  there  are,  either 
in  heaven,  or  on  earth;  and  yet  the  Bible  does  teach  that  men  be- 
come angels.  In  the  Hebrew,  in  Isa.  42 :  :19;  Hag.  1 : 13;  Mai.  3  : 
1,  what  in  the  common  English  version  is  "messenger,"  is  there 
"angel."  In  Revelations  1  :  20;  2:1,  8,  12,  etc.,  the  elders  in 
charge  of  the  seven  churches  of  Asia,  are  called  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
angels.  And  in  Rev.  19  : 10,  the  angel  who  ministers  to  John  says: 
UI  am  thy  fellow  servant,  and  of  thy  brethren  that  have  the  testimony  of  Jesus." 
0/here  signifies,  clearly,  from  among.  He  was,  therefore,  "from 
among"  those,  John's  "brethren  that  have  the  testimony  of  Jesus, 
*  *  *  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the  Spirit  of  prophecy."  Again, 
"The  Lord  came  from  Sinai,  and  rose  up  from  Seir  unto  them;  he 
shined  forth  from  Paran,  and  he  came  with  ten  thousand  of  saints; 
from  his  right  hand  went  forth  a  fiery  law,"  (Deut.  33:2).  Now 
David  calls  these  "saints"  "angels." — "The  chariots  of  God  are 
twenty  thousand,  even  thousands  of  angels;  the  Lord  is  among  them 
as  in  Sinai  in  the  holy  place,"  (Ps.  68  : 17).  This  identifies  these 
"saints,"  as  being  the  "angels"  of  God.  These  may  have  been  of 
that  company  of  saints  composed  of  Enoch  and  others,  who  were 
translated. 

Bingham,  in  his  Antiquities  of  the  Christian  Church,  p.  75,  states 
that  the  Bishops  were  called  the  "'angels  of  the  churches;  a  name 
which  some  authors  suppose  to  be  used  by  St.  Paul,  1  Cor.  11  : 10." 
Now,  inasmuch  as  the  ministers  of  God,  under  the  Old  Testament, 
and  the  New  Testament,  were  called  angels,  why  may  not  Adam  be 
be  also  called  an  angel  ?  And  inasmuch  as  the  personage  who  min- 
istered to  John,  and  who  was  "of"  John's  brethren,  was  called  an 
angel,  and  was  an  angel,  why  may  not  others  of  John's  faithful  breth- 
ren, and  Adam  pre-eminent  among  them,  become  "angels?"  Jesus 
says : 

uThey  which  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to  obtain  that  world,  and  the  resur- 
rection from  the  dead,  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage;  neither  can 
they  die  any  more;  for  they  are  equal  unto  the  angels." — Luke  20 : 35,  36.  "But 
are  as  the  angels  of  God  in  heaven." — Matt.  22: 30. 

Being  then  "as  the  angels  of  God  in  heaven,"  and  "equal  unto 
the  angels,"  will  Mr.  S.  tell  us  wherein  they  differ  from  them.  And 
inasmuch  as  they  are  changed  into  the  condition,  and  nature,  of  "the 
angels  of  God  in  heaven,"  are  they  not,  substantially,  angels?  It  is 


90  The  Divine  Calling  of 

true  that  man  was  made  "a  little  lower  than  the  angels,"  (of  heaven), 
being  made  liable  to  death,  possessing  less  power,  and  having  a  more 
limited  sphere  than  they,  but  that  is  not  to  say  that  men  may  not 
become  angels,  in  a  limited  sense,  while  in  this  life,  and  "as  the  an- 
gels of  God  in  heaven"  in  a  world  to  come.  Christ,  before  his  in- 
carnation, ministered  as  the  '-'angel  of  the  Lord."  Gen.  22  : 15;  Ex. 
3  :  2,  6,  14;  Acts  7  :  30-35;  Gen.  48  : 15,  16,  with  Heb.  1 :  2,  3,  8, 
10;  1  Cor.  15  :47.  Arid  he  is  now  "a  quickening  Spirit." — 1  Cor. 
15:45. 

Inasmuch  as  resurrected  holy  men  are  made  "equal  unto  the  an- 
gels" and  -as  the  angels  of  God  in  heaven."  why  riot  those  who  are 
translated — Enoch,  Elijah,  and  probably  others — why  not  they  be 
"equal  unto/'  and  "as  the  angels  of  God  in  heaven  ?"  This  is  further 
seen  in  the  fact  that  the  Lord  promised  to  send  '-Elijah  the  prophet" 
(Mai.  4  : 5,  6)  "to  minister  to  them  who  shall  be  heirs  of  salvation," 
Heb.  1  : 14.  In  Luke  9  :  30,  31,  Moses  and  Elias  (Elijah)  appear 
in  the  capacity  of  angels,  though  not  in  the  name  of  angels. 

''There  talked  with  him  [Christ]  two  men,  which  were  Moses  and  Elias;  who 
appeared  in  glory,  and  spake  of  his  decease,  which  he  should  accomplish  at  Je- 
rusalem." 

Angels  were  frequently  called  men  (Gen.  18 :  2;  Josh.  5  : 13,  15; 
Luke  24:4;  Acts  1:10;  Heb.  13:2,  etc.,  etc.).  Now,  all  these 
proofs  place  the  matter  beyond  question:  (1)  that  men  in  this  life 
are  sometimes  called  angels;  and  (2)  that  translated  persons,  and 
resurrected  persons,  become  -equal  unto,"  and  "as  the  angels  of  God 
in  heaven ;"  and  (3)  that  some  of  them  have  ministered  in  that 
capacity. 

THREE  FUTURE  WORLDS. 

Mr.  S.  next  opposes  the  idea  that  there  are  "three  future  worlds 
— celestial,  terrestial,  and  telestiaL"  He  says: 

"Celestial  means  heavenly;  terrestial  means  earthly;  but  what  does  telestial 
mean?" 

Why,  Mr.  S.,  it  means  "the  glory  of  the  stars,"  (1  Cor.  15  : 21),  the 
last  and  least  "order"  of  glory  in  the  resurrection,  (1  Cor.  15  :  21,  23, 
24),  and  is  to  be  possessed  by  those  worthy  of  it,  when  the  Lord  judges 
all  men  "according  to  their  works"  (Rev.  20  : 13;  Rom.  2:6;  Matt. 
16  :  27;  Rom.  14  : 11,  12).  It  is  not  "the  Restorationist's  hell/' 
as  you  flippantly  assert;  but  it  is  that  condition  of  future  being  and 
glory  into  which  "they  who  are  thrust  down  to  hell  *  *  who  are  not 
redeemed  from  the  devil  until  the  last  resurrection,  until  the  Lord, 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  91 

even  Christ  the  Lamb  shall  have  finished  his  work,"  (D.  C.  76 : 
shall  finally  be  brought.  "The  wicked  shall  be  turned  into 
and  all  the  nations  that  forget  God/'  (Ps.  9  :  17);  yet  "death 
heW  shall  deliver  up  the  dead  which  are  in  them,  and  they  shall  be* 
"judged  every  man  according  to  his  works/'  (Rev.  20  : 13).  Jonah 
says:  "Out  of  the  belly  of  hell  [a  place  of  God's  punishment]  cried 
I,  and  thou  heardest  my  voice/'  (Jonah  2:2).  So  from  these,  and* 
other  Bible  testimonies,  we  learn,  that  although  the  wicked  may, 
and  do,  go  down  to  hell,  it  is  for  their  punishment,  and  reform,  and 
that  it  is  not  the  purpose  of  God  that  they  should  eternally  remain 
there;  nor  is  it  his  purpose  that  they  should  become  unconscious  at 
death  and  remain  so  till  they  are  resurrected  and  judged,  and  then 
be  annihilated;  for  that  would  defeat  justice  and  pervert  equity,, 
and  render  forever  impossible  the  just  judgment  of  God,  "who  with- 
out respect  to  persons  judgeth  according  to  every  man's  work"  (1 
Pet,  1 : 17). 

That  all  the  race  (with  one  class  as  an  exception — they  who  SIB, 
against  the  Holy  Ghost),  will  be  subdued  unto  God,  and  will  finally 
know  and  confess  Christ,  is  evident  from  the  Scriptures.  Paul  says: 

'•That  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow,  of  things  in  heaven,  and- 
things  in  earth,  and  things  under  the  earth;  and  that  every  tongue  should  con^. 
fess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father."— Phil.  2.;  .10,  IK 

John  says: 

"And  every  creature  which  is  in  heaven,  and  on  the  earth,  and  under  the- 
earth,  and  such  as  are  in  the  sea,  and  all  thai  are  in  them,  heard  I>  say  ing,  Bless- 
ing and  honor,  and  glory  and  power,  be  unto  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne^. 
and  unto  the  Lamb  forever  and  ever," — Rev.  5 : 13. 

There  is  a  wide  difference  in  men's  works,  and  consequently  there 
will  be  a  wide  difference  in  the  degrees  of  their  condemnation  and 
rewards,  and  in  their  future  conditions. 

They  of  the  telestial  glory  dwell  outside  of  the  city  New  Jerusa- 
lem, and  where  God  and  Christ  are  they  cannot  come : 

'Tor  without  [the  city]  are  dogs,  and  sorcerers,  and  whoremongers,  and  mur- 
derers, and  idolaters,  and  whosoever  loveth  and  maketh  a  lie."— Rev.  22:15. 

"And  the  glory  of  the  telestial  is  one,  even  as  the  glory  of  the  stars  is  one, 
for  as  one  star  differs  from  another  star  in  glory,  even  so  differ  one  from  another 
in  glory  in  the  telestial  world ;  for  these  are  they  who  are  of  Haul  and  of  Apollos, 
and  of  Cephas ;  these  are  they  who  say  they  are  some  of  one  and  some  of  an- 
other, some  of  Christ  and  some  of  John,  and  some  of  Moses,  and  some  of  Elias* 
and  some  of  Esaias,  and  some  of  Isaiah,  and  some  of  Enoch,  but  received  not  the 
gospel,  neither  the  testimony  of  Jesus,  neither  the  prophets*;  neither  the  everlasting 
covenant:  last  of  all,  these  all  are  they  who  will  nott  be -gathered  with  the -saints,. 


92  The  Divine  Calling  of 

to  be  caught  up  unto  the  church  of  the  first  born,  and  received  into  the  cloud; 
these  are  they  who  are  liars,  and  sorcerers,  and  adulterers,  and  whoremongers, 
and  whosoever  loves  and  makes  a  lie;  these  are  they  who  suffer  the  vengeance 
of  eternal  fire;  these  are  they  who  are  cast  down  to  hell  and  suffer  the  wrath 
of  Almighty  God  until  the  fullness  of  times,  when  Christ  shall  have  subdued  all 
enemies  under  his  feet,  and  shall  have  perfected  his  work,  when  he  shall  deliver 
up  the  kingdom  and  present  it  unto  the  Father  spotless  saying :  I  have  overcome 
and  have  trodden  the  wine-press  of  the  fierceness  of  the  wrath  of  Almighty  God: 
then  shall  he  be  crowned  with  the  crown  of  his  glory  to  sit  on  the  throne  of 
his  power  to  reign  forever  and  ever.  But,  behold,  and  lo,  we  saw  the  glory 
and  the  inhabitants  of  the  telestial  world,  that  they  were  as  innumerable  as  the 
stars  in  the  firmament,  or  as  the  sand  upon  the  sea  shore,  and  heard  the  voice 
of  the  Lord  saying :  These  all  shall  bow  the  knee,  and  every  tongue  shall  confess 
to  him  who  sits  upon  the  throne  forever  and  eter;  for  they  shall  be  judged  ac- 
cording to  their  works ;  and  every  man  shall  receive  according  to  his  own  works, 
and  his  own  dominion,  in  the  mansions  which  are  prepared,  and  they  shall  be 
servants  of  the  Most  High,  but  where  God  and  Christ  dwell  they  cannot  come, 
worlds  without  end." — D.  C.  76:  7. 

The  foregoing  is  a  brief  explanation  of  what  the  telestial  glory  is, 
or  means.  In  it  we  see  the  benevolent  provisions  of  an  All-wise 
God  for  the  future  conditions  of  erring  man. 

The  terrestial  glory  is  greatly  in  advance  of  that  of  the  telestial 
world,  while  the  celestial  is  vastly  superior  to  the  terrestial,  it  being 
the  glory  of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  where  they  who  enjoy  it  are 
made  possessors  of  all  things — those  things  that  "eye  hath  not  seen, 
nor  ear  heard,  nor  hath  entered  into  the  heart  of  man/'  except  as 
revealed  unto  some  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  With  "the  second  death" 
and  eternal  perdition  for  those  only  who  become  like  the  devil  and 
his  angels. 

The  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  verdict  of  all  right-mind- 
ed people,  is,  that  all  mankind,  without  respect  of  persons,  should 
be  judged  according  to  their  icorks;  and  this  provision  of  the  three 
glories,  or  "three  future  worlds/'  as  Mr.  S.  is  pleased  to  call  them, 
meets  all  the  demands  of  the  case,  manifesting  alike  the  justice,  the 
equity,  and  the  love  of  God. 

That  doctrine  is  neither  sensible  nor  Scriptural,  however  popular 
it  may  be,  that  reckons  all  sinners  alike  in  the  sight  of  God — that 
ranks  the  midnight  assassin,  the  red-handed  murderer,  and  those  of 
the  viler  sort,  with  the  Sabbath-breaker,  the  common  liar,  or  the 
petty  thief,  in  the  same  class.  All  are  transgressors,  but  not  to  the 
same  degree;  and  therefore  justice,  equity,  and  mercy  demand  that 
there  should  be  a  difference  in  their  judgment.  Jesus  teaches  in 
plain  terms  that  "it  shall  be  more  tolerable"  for  one  class  of  sinners 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  93 

in  the  day  of  judgment  than  for  others,  (Matt.  11 :  22,  24;  10  : 15; 
12  :  41,  42).  But  this  could  not  be  true  if  all  kinds  and  classes  of 
sinners  went  down  to  hell  at  death  and  remained  there  worlds  with- 
out end,  as  some  teach;  or  if  the  wicked  were  unconscious  after 
death  till  their  resurrection,  and  were  then  simply  judged  and  anni- 
hilated, as  others  teach.  God  is  just,  and  his  tender  mercies,  are 
over  all  his  works,  to  do  right  by  them. 

THE  SOUL  OP  MAN. 

Mr.  S.  next  enters  into  a  profitless  quibble  in  regard  to  what  is 
said  in  the  revelations  about  the  soul  of  man, — "And  the  spirit  and 
the  body  is  the  soul  of  man.  And  the  resurrection  from  the  dead 
is  the  redemption  of  the  soul/'  (D.  C.  85  : 4).  "0  God,  receive  my 
soul/'  (Mosiah  9:5).  Mr.  8.  says : 

"Did  he  mean  receive  my  spirit  and  body?" 

To  this  we  reply,  that  the  meaning  of  a  word  is  to  be  deter- 
mined by  the  office  it  performs  in  a  sentence.  This  is  an  essential 
law  of  language.  Consequently,  when  I  speak  of  a  door,  I  may 
speak  of  an  aperture  or  passage-way  into  a  room  or  building,  or,  of 
that  which  fills  the  aperture,  or  shuts  up  the  passage.  When  we 
speak  of  a  gate,  we  may  mean  the  opening,  or  entrance,  or  we  may 
mean  that  which  closes  up  the  entrance.  When  we  use  the  word 
cleave,  it  may  signify  adhere,  unite;  or  it  may  mean,  to  part,  separ- 
ate, divide.  The  meaning  of  these  words  and  thousands  of  others, 
soul  included,  has  various  meanings,  which  can  be  determined  only 
by  the  office  they  perform  in  their  connection  with  other  words. 

The  soul,  in  Gen.  2 :  T — "man  became  a  living  soul/' — relates  to 
man  as  a  living  being  composed  of  body  and  spirit,  (Eccl.  12:7; 
Jas.  2 : 26.  So  Lev.  23  :  30 ;  Acts  27 : 37 ;  1  Pet.  3 : 20,  etc.).  But 
in  Gen.  35 ;  18, — "as  her  soul  was  in  departing,"  and  1  Kings  17  : ' 
21, — "let  this  child's  soul  come  into  him  again;  and  Prov.  16  :  24, 
— "Pleasant  words  are  sweet  to  the  soul;"  and  Matt.  10  :  28, — "Fear 
not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul;"  and 
Acts  14 :  22, — "confirming  the  souls  of  the  disciples;"  and  Rev.  6  : 
9, — "I  saw  under  the  altar  the  souls  of  them  that  were  slain  for  the 
word  of  God,  and  for  the  testimony  which  they  held,"  with  scores 
of  other  passages  which  might  be  quoted,  the  word  soul  clearly  re- 
lates, not  to  the  body,  but  to  the  spirit  of  man.  So  then,  the  spirit 
of  man  is  the  soul  as  taught  in  Mosiah,  and  the  spirit  and  body  is 


The  Divine  Calling  of 


also  the  soul,  as  taught  in  D.  C.  85  :  4;  and  there  is  no  contradic- 
tion, though  Mr.  S.  would  love  to  make  it  appear  so. 

NON-ENGLISH  WORDS. 

!Mr.  S.  complains  that: 

*4In  translating  the  Book  of  Mormon,  words  arc  often  used  not  contained  in 
%he  English  language.  The  following  is  a  sample:  'a  fifth  part  of  their  ziff.1  — 
ilos,  7:1." 

These  words  were  transferred,  probably,  because  there  were  no 
English  equivalents  for  them.  If  "ziff"  was  some  kind  of  metal,  as 
is  rather  likely,  it  is  not  at  all  strange  that  there  was  not,  at  the 
time  of  the  translation,  an  English  equivalent  for  it.  A  number  of 
aew  metals  have  been  discovered  since  then,  and  there  may  yet  be 
*nany  more  discovered,  and  possibly  the  very  kind  in  question. 

GIFT  TO  TRANSLATE. 

~Mr.  S.  wishes  to  know: 

'"(I)  Was  the  gift  [to  translate]  in  the  stone-interpreters,  or  in  Joseph?  (2) 
H  Joseph  himself  had  the  gift,  what  need  of  the  stones?  (3)  If  the  gift  was  in 
the  stones,  how  could  Joseph  lose  it,  without  losing  the  stones?1' 

To  the  first  question  we  reply:  the  gift  was  in  both,  —  in  the 
stones  as  a  means,  and  in  Joseph  as  an  agent  to  use  that  means.  To 
tlie  second  we  reply  :  Though  Joseph  was  the  agent  to  translate,  yet 
the  stones  were  necessary  as  a  means  by  which  to  work.  In  reply 
to  the  third  we  have  to  say,  —  that  Joseph  might  have  lost  liis  power 
«s  a  seer,  and  in  this  sense  lost  his  gift  to  translate;  or  he  might  have 
lost  the  stone,  which  was  a  means  in  translating.  An  astronomer 
may  lose  the  telescope  by  which  he  traces  the  pathway  of  the  stars, 
=aad  discovers  and  visits  those  beautiful  islands  of  light  in  the  limit- 
less expanse  of  the  heavens,  or  he  may  lose  his  natural  sight  —  the 
power  to  use  that  wonderful  instrument. 

TRIM  AND  THUMMIM. 

Mr.  S.  now  proceeds  to  enlighten  us  in  regard  to  the  Urim  and 
Thummim.  He  says: 

"The  Jewish  High  Priest  never  read  languages  by  this  means,  but  wore  them 
upon  his  breast-plate,  —  they  were  not  used  to  read  through,  but  were  outward 
•emblems  of  divine  illumination  upon  the  heart  of  the  wearer.11 

Brown,  in  his  Diet,  of  Bible,  art.  Urim  and  Thummim,  says, 
"What  they  were  cannot  be  determined."  Smith,  in  his  Diet.  Bi- 
£&,  says: 

4;In  what  way  the  Urim  and  Thummim  were  consulted  is  quite  uncertain. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  95 

Joseplms  and  the  rabbins  supposed  that  the  stones  gave  out  the  oracular  answer  by 
preternatural  illumination.  But  it  seems  to  be  far  simplest,  and  most  in  agree- 
ment with  the  different  accounts  of  inquiries  made  by  Urim  and  Thummim, 
(1  Sam. 3: 18, 19;  23:3,12;  28:6;  Judg.  20:28;  2  Sam.  5;  23,  &c.),  to  suppose 
that  the  answer  was  given  simply  by  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  the  high  priest 
(compare  John  11:51),  when  he  had  inquired  of  the  Lord,  clothed  with  the 
Ephod  and  breast-plate.1' 

Who  should  better  understand  than  "Josephus  and  the  rabbins?" 
None,  we  think,  but  those  who  are  favored  with  a  divine  revelation, 
or  with  experimental  knowledge,  as  Joseph  and  the  first  Elders  and 
members  of  the  church.  The  opinions  of  "Josephus  and  the  rab- 
bins" are  in  essential  accord  with  the  statements  of  Joseph,  0.  Cow- 
dery,  M.  Harris,  D.  Whitmer,  and  others,  and  quite  adverse  to  the 
opinion  volunteered  by  Mr.  S.  The  Septuagint  Bible  renders  the 
signification  of  Urim  and  Thummim,  as  "revelation  and  truth" 
Whiston,  in  a  note,  on  p.  94,  Josephus  j  says  that  the  "shining  stones" 
were  used  in  revealing  the  will  of  God,  after  &  perfect  and  true  man- 
ner to  his  people  Israel.  Of  these  stones  Josephus,  Ant.  Jews,  B. 
3,  ch.  9,  par.  9,  says,  "Now  this  breast-plate,  and  sardonyx  left  off 
shining  two  hundred  years  before  I  composed  this  book."  With  the 
information  we  have  before  us,  one  thing  is  certain,  and  that  is,  that 
the  Urim  and  Thummim,  as  Joseph  claims,  was  a  divine  means  of 
revelation  from  God,  "after  a  perfect  and  true  manner;"  and  that 
it  was  through  the  "preternatural  illumination"  of  the  stones.  That 
it  was  a  means  of  obtaining  revelation  and  instruction  directly  from 
God  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  Joshua  "shall  stand  before  Eleazer  the 
priest,  who  shall  ask  counsel  for  him  after  the  judgment  [decision, 
revelation]  of  Urim  before  the  Lord,"  (Num.  27:21);  and  that, 
"When  Saul  inquired  of  the  Lord,  the  Lord  answered  him  not, 
neither  by  dreams,  nor  l>y  Urim,  nor  by  prophets,"  (1  Sam.  28  :  6). 
In  all  these  evidences  we  see  that  it  was  a  means  of  revelation  from 
God,  enabling  those  gifted  with  the  power  to  use  it  to  read  and  learn 
in  regard  to  hidden  matters,  and  know  what  was  otherwise  secret 
and  unrevealed. 

FIRST  GIFT. 

Mr.  S.  thinks  he  has  found  "a  direct  collision"  in  the  fact  of  Jo- 
seph's having  the  gift  of  prophecy,  in  connection  with  0.  Cowdery, 
May,  1829,  when  they  baptized  each  other,  whereas  a  command- 
ment was  given  in  March,  1829,  two  months  before,  saying  to  Jo- 
seph: 


96  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"And  you  have  a  gift  to  translate  the  plates,  and  this  is  the  first  gift  that  I 
bestowed  upon  you ;  and  I  have  commanded  that  you  pretend  to  no  other  gift 
until  my  purpose  is  fulfilled  in  this,  for  I  will  grant  unto  you  no  other  gift  until 
it  is  finished."— D.  C.  4: 1. 

That  this  could  have  no  direct  reference  to  spiritual  gifts,  such  as 
discerning  of  spirits,  visions,  angelic  ministrations,  revelations,  etc., 
etc..  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  Joseph  possessed  all  these  for 
months,  and  years,  prior  to  the  revelation.  It  referred,  no  doubt, 
to  matters  of  translation,  the  chief  topic  of  the  clause  quoted,  and 
to  showing  the  plates  to  others.  Joseph  had  "the  gift"  to  translate 
only  the  unsealed  part  of  the  plates,  and  he  was  not  privileged  to 
show  the  plates  to  any  until  the  translation  was  completed;  for  Jo- 
seph says; 

'•The  same  heavenly  messenger  delivered  them  up  to  me  with  this  charge : 
that  I  should  be  responsible  for  them :  and  that  if  I  should  let  them  go  carelessly, 
or  through  any  neglect  of  mine,  I  should  be  cut  off;  but  that  if  I  would  use  my 
endeavors  to  preserve  them,  until  he,  the  messenger  should  call  for  them,  they 
should  be  protected.'' — Millennial  Star,  voL  14,  Supplement,  page  6. 

And  it  was  further  said  to  Joseph : 

"I  have  caused  you  that  you  should  enter  into  a  covenant  with  me,  that  you 
should  not  show  them  [the  plates]  except  to  those  persons  whom  I  commanded 
you,  and  you  have  no  power  over  them  except  /  grant  it  unto  you." — D.  C.  4: 1. 

Xow  this  was  said  to  Joseph  because  Martin  Harris  "desired  a 
witness  [at  the  hand  of  the  Lord]  that  you,  my  servant  Joseph 
Smith.  Jr.,  have  got  the  plates  of  which  you  have  testified  and  borne 
record  that  you  have  received  of  me/;  (D.  C.  4 : 1).  In  June  of 
1829,  Martin  Harris  obtained  from  the  desired  witness,  in  connec- 
tion with  P.  "Whitrner  and  0.  Cowdery.  Xow  Joseph  had  the  gift 
to  trantlatc  the  plates,  but  not  to  sliou:  them  until  the  translation 
was  finished.  This  is  the  easy  and  natural  solution  of  what  Mr.  S. 
has  labored  hard  to  make  :'a  puzzle."  and  a  contradiction. 

IMITATING  BIBLE. 

Mr.  S.  says: 

"The  Book  of  Mormon  betrays  its  weakness  in  imitating  the  style  of  Bible 
phraseology — a  style  in  common  use  at  the  time  our  Bible  was  first  translated 
into  the  English  language,  but  which  has  long  since  ceased  to  be  used,  except 
as  it  is  retained  in  our  version  of  the  Bible." 

All  critics  do  not  agree  with  Mr.  S.  on  this  point.  Some  hold 
that  the  dissimilarity  in  the  style  of  the  two  books,  in  respect  to 
their  phraseology,  is  evidence  that  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  spurious. 
That  the  style  of  speech  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  somewhat  like 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  97 

that  of  the  Bible,  especially  the  Old  Testament,  is  true;  but  that 
it  is  strikingly  so,  is  not  true,  as  any  one  who  carefully  reads  the  two 
books  can  see.  That  the  diction,  or  manner  of  expression,  peculiar  to 
both  the  Bible  and  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  largely  and  mainly  due 
to  the  style  of  the  originals,  is,  we  think,  a  well  attested  fact;  though 
of  the  Bible  Mr-  8.  asserts  to  the  contrary,  holding  that  its  style  of 
phraseology  is  due  to  that  which  was  common  to  its  translators. 
Max  Miiller,  one  of  England's  most  eminent  scholars,  in  one  of  his 
Essays  on  the  Science  of  Religion,  holds  the  very  opposite  of  Mr.  S. 
Prof.  Miiller,  in  his  admirable  and  successful  effort  to  prove  that  the 
Hebrew  original  of  created — "bara,"  (Gen.  1  :  1,  etc.),  signifies  "to 
create  out  of  pre-existing  matter,"  says: 

"In  the  minds  of  those  whom  Moses  addressed,  and  whose  language  he  spoke, 
it  [the  phrase,  or  form  of  expression,  by  which  he  speaks  of  God's  creating 
heaven  and  earth]  could  only  have  called  forth  the  simple  conception  of  fashion- 
ing or  arranging.  *  *  *  To  find  out  how  the  words  of  the  Old  Testament  were 
understood  by  those  to  whom  they  were  originally  addressed  is  a  task  attempted 
by  a  very  few  interpreters  of  the  Bible.  The  great  majority  of  readers  transfer 
without  hesitation  the  ideas  which  they  connect  with  words  as  used  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  to  the  mind  of  Moses  or  his  cotemporaries,  forgetting  altogether 
the  distance  which  divides  their  language  and  their  thoughts  from  the 'thoughts 
and  language  of  the  wandering  tribes  of  Israel." 

Again: 

"It  is  well  known  that  we  have  in  the  language  of  the  New  Testament  the 
clear  vestiges  of  Greek  and  Roman  influences,  and  if  we  knew  nothing  of  the 
historical  intercourse  between  those  two  nations  and  the  writers  of  the  New 
Testament,  the  very  expressions  [phraseology]  used  by  them,  not  only  their 
language,  but  their  thoughts,  their  allusions,  illustrations  and  similes,  would*  en- 
able us  to  say  that  some  historical  contact  had  taken  place  between  the  philos- 
ophers of  Greece,  the  lawgivers  of  Rome,  and  the  people  of  Judea.  *  *  *  Why 
should  there  be  any  hesitation  in  pointing  out  in  the  Old  Testament  an  Egyp- 
tian custom,  or  a  Greek  word,  or  a  Persian  conception.  If  Moses  was  learned  in 
all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  nothing  surely  would  stamp  his  writings  as 
more  truly  historical  than  traces  of  Egyptian  influences  that  might  be  discovered 
in  his  laws." 

Now  all  this  teaches  that  the  style  of  expression — the  phraseology 
— as  well  as  the  ideas,  of  God's  ancient  people  are  sought  to  be 
preserved  in  the  common  version  of  the  Bible.  And  it  is  not  at 
all  strange  that  there  should  be  some  similarity  between  the  w-ritings 
of  the  ancient  Nephites  in  America  and  the  ancient  Israelites  in 
Judea;  for  both  sprang  from  the  same  nation,  having  the  same 
language  in  the  main,  and  the  same  Scriptures  up  to  the  time  of 


98  The  Divine  Calling  of 

Jeremiah,  and  were   taught   by  the  same  Spirit   from  one  and  the 
same  God,  and  the  same  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

ELI  AS GABRIEL. 

Mr.  S-  objects  to  the  revelations  of  Joseph  because  that  in  D.  C. 
26 : 2,  it  is  said:  "Which  Zachariah  he  [Elias]  visited,  and  gave 
promise  that  he  should  have  a  son,  and  his  name  should  be  John," 
whereas  in  Luke  1 : 19.  the  angel's  name  is  said  to  be  "Gabriel." 

Angels,  as  well  as  others,  may  have  different  names.  Peter  was 
sometimes  called  Cephas  and  sometimes  Simon.  Jesus  had  many 
titles — Christ,  the  Lord,  the  Holy  One.  Messiah,  Immanuel,  etc., 
etc.  Mr.  S.  says  "it  is  a  trick  of  rogues."  to  change  ones  name. 
\Yas  it  a  "trick  of  rogues"  for  Peter,  and  Jesus,  and  Jacob,  and 
Abraham,  and  Saul  of  Tarsus,  and  hosts  of  other  Bible  worthies,  to 
change  their  names?  Are  you  not  rather  sweeping  in  your  denun- 
ciations, Mr.  S  ?  In  your  effort  to  thus  strike  down  "Mormonism," 
are  you  not  fighting  against  the  facts  of  the  Bible?  Men  of  God, 
as  also  Christ,  have  various  names,  which  are  alike  honored  of  God 
by  their  being  used  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  Why  then  should  it  be 
thought  unreasonable  that  angels  should  have  different  names,  and 
that  the  angel  who  announced  to  Zacharias  the  birth  of  John  should 
be  called  both  Elias  and  Gabriel?  Presumptive  evidence  that  the 
angel  "Gabriel"  was  none  other  than  "Elias"  lies  in  the  peculiarity 
of  the  promise:  "And  he  [John]  shall  go  before  him  in  the  spirit 
and  power  of  Elias,"  (Luke  1  :  17),  from  which  it  maybe  easily  in- 
ferred that  "Elias"  (Elijah,  Heb.)  would  be  "his  angel,"  to  watch 
over,  direct,  and  aid  him,  in  his  life  and  ministry.  Further  evidence 
lies  in  the  promise  made  through  Malachi,  4  :  5,  "Behold,  I  will 
send  you  Elijah  [Elias,  Gr.],  the  prophet  before  the  coming  of  the 
great  and  dreadful  day  of  the  Lord,"  which  Jesus  applies  to  John 
the  Baptist;  (Matt.  11  :  1-4:  17  :  12);  and  yet  which  John  denies, 
(John  1  :  21).  when  he  said  he  was  not  the  Elias.  John  was  the 
Elias  to  that  generation,  inasmuch  as  he  acted  under  the  minis- 
tration of  Elias  (Elijah,  Heb.).  his  angel:  yet  personally  he  was  not 
the  Elias.  but  only  John  the  Baptist.  In  this  we  have  a  rational 
•solution  of  a  seeming  contradiction  between  the  testimony  of  John 
and  Christ;  and  by  this  we  also  obtain  a  clue  to  the  idea  that  the 
angel  Gabriel  was  none  other  than  the  prophet  Elijah,  who  was 
translated  without  seeing  death,  (2  Kings  2:1,  11).  Inasmuch  as 
John  was  to  go  before  Christ  "in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elias," 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  99 

[Elijah],  what  more  proper  than  that  this  translated  prophet  should 
announce  to  Zacharias  the  birth  and  mission  of  John?  And  what 
more  proper  than  that  this  translated  prophet,  now  that  his  condition 
was  so  changed  toward  God,  should,  like  Abram,  Jacob,  Saul,  Peter, 
and  others,  have  "a  new  name,"  and  be  called  "Gabriel,"  as  well  as 
"Elias?"  These  ideas  are  in  exact  accordance  with  Bible  facts;  and 
the  thought  that  the  angel  Gabriel  is  the  translated  prophet  Elijah, 
is  good  evidence  of  the  divinity  of  that  revelation  of  the  young  Seer 
in  which  it  is  found. 

THE  PLATES,  AND  THE  WITNESSES. 

We  now  come  to  another  link  in  the  lengthy  chain  of  objections 
urged  by  Mr.  S.,  and  to  the  weakest  and  most  unreasonable  so  far. 
Itls  in  regard  to  the  testimony  of  the  three  and  the  eight  witnesses 
to  the  Book  of  Mormon.  Mr.  S.  admits  what  no  reasonable  and  in- 
formed person  can  well  deny,  that  "  Joseph  might  have  had  plates  of 
some  kind,  either  found  or  prepared  to  imitate  gold;"  yet  he  claims 
that  the  witnesses,  all  of  them,  the  three  and  the  eight,  were  mis- 
taken— that  is,  deceived — and  that  their  testimony  is  contradictory ; 
and  that  many  of  its  essential  parts  are  based  on  second-hand  testi- 
mony— "on  the  strength  of  Joseph's  word."  Mr.  S  ,  in  his  method 
of  argument,  reaches  the  very  climax  of  absurdity,  and  exposes  him- 
self on  every  hand  to  contempt  for  his  wit,  and  to  painful  distrust 
of  the  piety  of  his  intentions.  He  inquires, — 

"How  did  the  three  witnesses  see  the  plates?  In  a  revelation  made  to  them 
'previous  to  their  viewing  the  plates1  it  was  said  to  them :  'It  is  by  your  faith 
that  you  shall  obtain  a  view  of  them,  even  by  that  faith  which  was  had  by  the 
prophets  of  old.1 — D.  C.  15 :  1.  How  much  faith  would  it  require  to  see  a  piece 
of  gold  where  it  really  existed?  Not  much;  but  where  it  did  not  exist,  it 
might  ,need  considerable  faith  to  view  it.  Doubtless  this  might  have  been  so 
with  these  sacred  plates;  they  believed  that  what  they  saw  was  gold;  that  an 
angel  brought  them ;  and  that  the  voice  of  God  endorsed  the  translation,  being 
told  all  this  by  Joseph.11 

The  eight  witnesses  (not  the  three),  claim  that  the  plates  "have 
the  appearance  of  gold ;"  and  claim  also  to  have  handled  them  with 
their  hands,  and  to  have  hefted  them  likewise.  Mr.  S.  questions 
the  propriety  of  their  faith  having  anything  to  do  with  their  seeing 
the  plates,  and  argues  substantially,  that  they  only  imagined  that 
they  saw  them.  It  is  not  at  all  strange  that  most  implicit  faith 
(not  imaginings)  should  be  required  of  the  three  witnesses,  who  saw 
the  plates  in  the  hands  of  the  angel  of  God,  in  an  open  vision. 


100  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"Without  faith  it  is  impossible  to  please  God.'1 — Heb.  11:  6. 

uGo  thy  way;  and  as  thou  hast  believed,  so  be  it  done  unto  thee.  And  his 
servant  was  healed  from  that  hour." — Matt.  8:13. 

"But  the  word  preached  did  not  profit  them,  [Israel],  not  being  mixed  with 
faith  in  them  that  heard  it.11— Heb.  4:  2. 

"For  whatsoever  is  not  of  faith  is  sin." — Rom.  14:  23. 

"Having  then  gifts  differing  according  to  the  grace  that  is  given  to  us,  whether 
prophecy,  let  us  prophesy  according  to  the  proportion  of  faith." — Rom.  12 :  6. 

"Then  came  the  disciples  to  Jesns  apart,  and  said,  Why  could  not  we  cast 
him  out?  And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Because  of  your  unbelief." — Matt. 
17:20. 

"And  he  did  not  many  mighty  works  there  [in  his  own  country]  because  of 
their  unbelief."— Matt.  13:  58. 

"Jesus  said  unto  him,  If  thou  canst  believe,  all  things  are  possible  to  him 
that  belie veth."— Mark  9 :  23. 

"If  ye  will  not  believe,  surely  ye  shall  not  be  established." — Isa.  7 :  9. 

Time  would  fail  us  to  cite  the  innumerable  evidences  that  God 
works  among  his  people  according  to  their  faith.  Why  should  a 
professor  of  the  religion  of  the  Bible  scoff  at  the  idea  that  these  three 
witnesses  must  have  faith  in  God  in  order  to  be  worthy  to  behold 
the  wonderful  vision  by  the  power  of  God,  of  these  sacred  plates? 
Has  he  forgotten  the  scriptures?  Or  is  he  so  unfair,  so  partisan, 
as  to  allow  that  faith  was  essential  in  the  service  of  God  in  ancient 
times,  but  not  necessary  now  I 

'  As  to  his  insinuation  that  the  witnesses  merely  imagined  that 
what  they  saw  was  gold,  its  folly  is  so  self-evident  that  a  reply  is 
scarcely  needed.  The  eleven  witnesses, — 0.  Cowdery,  M.  Harris, 
D.  Whitmer,  Hiram  Page,  Joseph  Smith,  sen.,  Jacob  Whitmer, 
Christian  Whitmer,  Peter  Whitmer,  jun.,  John  Whitmer,  Hyrum 
Smith,  and  Samuel  H.  Smith. — were  men  of  at  least  ordinary  natural 
abilities,  while  many  of  them  had  a  fair  English  education,  and  a 
moderate  acquaintance  with  the  common  affairs  of  business.  Now 
it  is  highly  improbable,  if  not  quite  impossible,  for  an  illiterate 
young  man  of  from  twenty-three  to  twenty-five  years  of  age,  as  was 
Joseph  Smith,  with  whom  they  were  most  intimately  acquainted, 
and  with  whom  they  were  frequently  associated,  to  have  deceived 
these  eleven  witnesses  in  the  manner  claimed  by  Mr.  S.  The  idea 
is  absolutely  preposterous,  and  reflects  but  little  credit  upon  the 
sagacity  of  the  one  who  originated  it.  Gold,  as  a  medium  of  ex- 
change, was  then  in  common  use,  so  that  persons  doing  any  business 
at  all  would  have  some  actual  knowledge  as  to  what  was  gold,  and 
what  was  not.  To  think  that  Joseph  Smith  could  have  prepared  a 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  101 

large  book  of  plates,  "having  the  appearance  of  ancient  work,  and 
of  curious  workmanship,  which  have  the  appearance  of  gold/'  and 
could  have  imposed  them  upon  eleven  sensible,  intelligent  men,  some 
of  whom  were  skilled  in  all  the  common  affairs  of  life,  may  do  for 
idiots,  for  men  without  brains,  but  not  for  those  who  have  an  or- 
dinary measure  of  common  sense. 

Says  Mr.  S.,  "They  believed  that  what  they  saw  was  gold;"  and 
he  thinks  "tin  plates,  dipped  in  a  dye  that  would  give  them  a  golden 
color  to  superficial  observers,  would  suffice  in  the  hands  of  Joseph 
to  get  such  a  certificate/'  as  is  given  by  the  eight  witnesses.  If 
they  could  be  so  easily  duped  in  respect  to  color,  how  then  in  res- 
pect to  the  great  number  of  the  plates,  and  how  in  respect  to  their 
being  "of  ancient  work,  and  of  curious  workmanship?"  If  there 
had  been  but  one  plate,  and  that  without  engravings,  it  would  have 
been  next  to  impossible  for  the  young  and  inexperienced  Joseph  to 
have  deceived  the  eleven  witnesses,  or  even  the  eight,  in  respect  to 
its  material,  and  general  character.  But  for  him  to  prepare  a  large 
book  of  plates,  and  those  plates  elaborately  engraved  with  characters 
that  had  "the  appearance  of  ancient  work,  and  of  curious  workman- 
ship"— a  work  requiring  great  labor  arid  most  consummate  skill — 
and  then  palm  them  upon  eleven  rational  men  as  genuine  records, 
records  of  very  remote  ages,  and  sacred  at  that,  is  quite  past  belief. 
The  facts  are,  their  testimony  is  true,  and  valid  for  the  purposes  for 
which  it  was  given,  or  else  these  witnesses  are  deceivers  of  the 
basest  class.  The  eight  witnesses  say : 

"We  did  handle  with  our  hands  *  *  *  as  many  of  the  leaves  as  the  said 
Smith  has  translated;  *  *  *  we  have  seen  and  hefted,  [i.e.  lifted,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  judging  of  their  weight],  and  know  of  a  surety  that  the  said  Smith  has 
got  the  plates  of  which  we  have  spoken.11 

Mr.  S.  affirms. 

"The  testimony  of  the  eight  witnesses  disagrees  with  the  three.  They  do 
not  claim  that  an  angel  brought  the  plates  from  heaven  for  them  to  view,  and 
they  deny  that  they  were  in  the  possession  of  the  angel.11 

It  is  true  that  "TVieydonot  claim  that  an  angel  brought  the 
plates  from  heaven  for  them  to  view;"  but  it  is  not  true  that  "they 
deny  that  they  were  in  the  possession  of  the  angel."  They  simply 
testify  that  when  they  saw  them,  handled  them,  and  hefted  them, 
that  then  Joseph  Smith  did  have  the  plates.  As  to  the  fact  of  the 
angel's  having  them  both  before  and  after,  that  time,  they  do  not 


102  The  Divine  Calling  of 

testify,  and  this  was  very  proper.     In   regard  to  the  testimony  of 
the  three  witnesses,  in  particular,  Mr.  S.  says: 

"They  believed  that  what  they  saw  was  gold;  that  an  angel  brought  them; 
and  that  the  voice  of  God  endorsed  the  translation,  being  told  all  this  by 
Joseph.1' 

In  the  first  place  the  three  do  not  testify  as  to  the  plates  being 
gold,  or  as  to  their  believing  they  were  gold,  as  before  seen.  In 
the  next  place,  these  are  not  very  judicious  comments  upon  the  in- 
telligence and  shrewdness  of  the  three  witnesses,  of  whom,  Mr.  S. 
knows  nothing  personally,  and  but  little  of  their  history;  and,  to 
our  mind,  his  view  of  the  case  is  very  damaging  to  his  judgment. 
For  Mr.  S.  to  assume  that  three  such  intelligent  and  experienced 
men  as  0.  Cowdery,  D.  Whitmer,  and  M.  Harris  were,  would  give 
to  the  world  a  certificate  so  definite  in  its  details,  and  so  highly  im- 
portant and  consequential  in  its  claims,  and  all  based  on  the  say  so 
of  Joseph  Smith,  is  to  exhibit  on  the  part  of  Mr.  S.  a  sorry  want  of 
mental  acumen.  And  for  them  to  testify,  "we  also  know  that  they 
[the  plates]  have  been  translated  by  the  gift  &&&  power  of  God,  for 
his  voice  hath  declared  it  unto  us;"  and  also  testify,  "we  have  seen 
the  engravings  which  are  upon  the  plates,  and  they  have  been  shown 
unto  us  by  the  power  of  God  and  not  of  man;"  and  further,  t;we 
declare  with  words  of  soberness,  that  an  angel  of  God  came  down 
from  heaven,  and  lie  brought  and  laid  before  our  eyes,  that  we  be- 
held and  saw  the  plates ,  and  the  engravings  thereon;"  and  still  fur- 
ther, "the  voice  of  the  Lord  commanded  us  that  we  should  bear 
record  of  it;"  and  for  them  to  do  all  this  upon  the  mere  word  or 
representation  of  Joseph  to  them — "being  told  all  this  by  Joseph," 
as  Mr.  S.  puts  it,  is  for  them  to  do  a  most  improbable  thing. 

They  testify  that  "the  voice  of  the  Lord"  commanded  them  to 
bear  record  of  the  witness  that  God  gave  them  concerning  the  Book 
of  Mormon.  They  testify  that  "an  angel  of  God  came  down  from 
heaven,  and  HE  brought  and  laid  before  our  eyes,  that  we  beheld 
and  saw  the  plates,  and  the  engravings  thereon."  They  testify  that 
the  plates  "have  been  translated  by  the  gift  and  power  of  Gfod,  for 
his  voice  hath  declared  it  unto  us."  And  yet  Mr.  S.  has  the  hardi- 
hood to  state  that 

"These  witnesses  do  not  say  that  they  saw  the  angel  come  down;  they  were 
doubtless  told  so  by  Joseph.  Nor  do  they  affirm  that  they  heard  the  voice  of 
God;  it  doubtless  came  through  Joseph's  revelation,  commanding  them  to  tes- 
tify. Thus  they  saw  no  angel,  and  heard  no  voice;  they  simply  affirmed  on  the 
strength  of  Joseph's  word;  If  they  really  had  seen  an  angel,  they  would  have 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  103 

said  so.     If  they  had  heard  a  voice  from  heaven,  they  would  have  said  so.     Nor 
is  it  sure  that  they  saw  the  plates,  except  by  faith  through  Joseph" 

This  is  the  extreme  of  nonsense.  It  is  more — it  is  basely  false, 
as  Mr.  S.  well  knows.  If  they,  personally,  saw  not  the  plates,  and 
the  engravings  thereon;  and  if  they  saw  not  '-an  angel  of  God" 
come  down  from  heaven;  and  if  the  angel  of  God  did  not  bring  the 
plates  and  lay  them  before  their  eyes;  and  if  they  did  not  hear  the 
voice  of  God  to  themselves;  and  if  the  plates  were  not  shown  to 
them  i;by  the  power  of  God  and  not  of  man,"  then  they  were  base 
and  willful  impostors,  for  they  unequivocally  affirm  as  much.  The 
disgraceful  prevarications  imputed  to  them  by  Mr.  S.,  have  not  the 
slightest  foundation  in  fact;  and  they  would  have  been  heartily 
spurned  by  those  .men  of  God.  and  hurled  back  with  scorn  upon 
those  who  might  have  suggested  them. 

0.  Cowdery,  who  became  an  attorney  of  pronounced  ability,  al- 
ways bore  an  undeviating  testimony  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  till  the 
cold  waves  of  death  swept  him  from  the  shores  of  tim?  into  the  world 
of  spirits.  And  he,  after  years  of  reflection  and  profound  thought 
upon  the  matter,  never  marred  his  testimony  by  such  quibbles  as 
are  presented  in  the  criticisms  of  Mr.  S. 

Martin  Harris,  now  passed  within  the  vail,  whose  years  reached 
more  than  fourscore  and  ten,  reaffirmed  his  testimony,  time  after 
time,  for  all  these  forty-five  years,  and  would  have  scorned  the 
thought  of  having  it  explained  after  the  manner  of  Mr.  S. 

David  Whitiner,  now  aged  over  seventy  years,  a  man  who,  by  his- 
upright  life,  commands  the  respect  and  esteem  of  all  who  know  him, 
a  man  of  high  intellectual  attainments,  as  noticed  in  the  former  part 
of  our  article,  he,  too,  unflinchingly  and  unqualifiedly,  maintains 
his  former  testimony  concerning  the  Book  of  Mormon.  He  would 
despise  the  thought  of  his  testimony  being  based  upon  such  grounds 
as  are  assumed  by  Mr.  S.,  or  of  explaining  away  its  point  and  force, 
as  Mr.  S.  has  sought  to  do. 

Joseph,  in  his  History  of  the  Church,  gives  an  account  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  three  witnesses  obtained  the  evidences  upon 
which  their  special  testimony  is  based.  He  says : 

uXot  many  days  after  the  above  commandment  [D.  C.  15]  was  given,  we 
four,  viz.,  Martin  Harris,  David  Whitmer,  Oliver  Cowdery,  and  myself,  agreed 
to  retire  into  the  woods,  and  try  to  obtain,  by  fervent  and  humble  prayer,  the 
fulfillment  of  the  promise  given  in  the  revelation — that  they  should  have  a  view 
of  the  plates,  &c.  "We  accordingly  made  choice  of  a  piece  of  woods  convenient 
to  Mr.  Whitmer's  house,  to  which  we  retired,  and  having  knelt  down,  we  be- 


104  The  Divine  Calling  of 

gan  to  pray  in  much  faith  to  AlmigLt/  G-od  to  bestow  upon  us  a  realization  of 
these  promises.  According  to  previous  arrangements  I  commenced  by  vocal 
prayer  to  our  heavenly  Fatber,  and  was  folJowed  by  each  of  the  rest  in  succes- 
sion. "We  did  not,  however,  obtain  any  answer  or  manifestation  of  the  divine 
favor  in  our  behalf.  We  again  observed  the  same  order  of  prayer,  each  calling 
on  and  praying  fervently  to  G-od  in  rotation,  but  with  the  same  result  as  before. 
Upon  this,  our  second  failure,  Martin  Harris  proposed  that  he  should  withdraw 
himself  from  us,  believing,  as  he  expressed  himself,  that  his  presence  was  the 
cause  of  our  not  obtaining  what  we  wished  for;  he  accordingly  withdrew  from 
us,  and  we  knelt  down  again,  and  had  not  been  many  minutes  engaged  in 
prayer,  when  presently  we  beheld  a  light  above  us  in  the  air,  of  exceeding 
brightness:  and  behold,  an  angel  stood  before  us;  in  his  hands  he  held  the 
plates  which  we  had  been  praying  for  these  to  have  a  view  of;  he  turned  over 
the  leaves  one  by  one,  so  that  we  could  see  them,  and  discover  the  engravings 
thereon  distinctly.  He  then  addressed  himself  to  David  Whitmer,  and  said, 
'David,  blessed  is  the  Lord  and  he  that  keeps  his  commandments.1  When,  im- 
mediately afterwards,  we  heard  a  voice  from  out  of  the  bright  light  above  us, 
saying,  'These  plates  have  been  revealed  by  the  power  of  God,  and  they  have 
been  translated  by  the  power  of  God.  The  translation  of  them  which  you  have 
seen  is  correct  and  I  command  you  to  bear  record  of  what  you  now  see  and  hear.' 
I  now  left  David  and  Oliver,  and  went  in  pursuit  of  Martin  Harris,  whom  I 
found  at  a  considerable  distance,  fervently  engaged  in  prayer.  He  soon  told  me, 
however,  that  he  had  not  yet  prevailed  with  the  Lord,  and  earnestly  requested 
me  to  join  him  in  prayer,  that  he  also  might  realize  the  same  blessings  which 
we  had  just  received.  We  accordingly  joined  in  prayer,  and  ultimately  obtained 
our  desires,  for,  before  we  had  yet  finished,  the  same  vision  was  opened  to  our 
view,  at  least  it  was  again  to  me,  and  I  once  more  beheld  and  heard  the  same 
things,  whilst  at  the  same  moment,  Martin  Harris  cried  out,  apparently  in  ec- 
stacy  of  joy,  "Tis  enough;  mine  eyes  have  beheld,1  and  jumping  up,  he  shouted 
'Hosannah,1  blessing  God,  and  otherwise  rejoiced  exceedingly. 

"Having  thus,  through  the  mercy  of  G-od,  obtained  these  manifestations,  it 
now  remained  for  these  three  individuals  to  fulfill  the  commandment  which  they 
had  received,  viz.,  to  bear  record  of  these  things;  in  order  to  accomplish  which, 
they  drew  up  and  described  [subscribed]  the  following  document.1' 

Here  follows  the  testimony  of  the  three  witnesses  as  found  on  the 
first  leaves  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  It  will  be  observed  that  "they" 
(the  "three  witnesses'')  "drew  up  and  described  [subscribed]  the 
following  document"  (their  testimony). 

To  the  question,  "Did  you  go  to  England  to  lecture  against  Mor- 
monism?" — a  question  propounded  by  Sr.  H.  B.  Emerson,  of  New 
Richmond,  0.,  in  1870,  Martin  Harris  replied:  (See  True  Latter 
Day  Saints  Herald,  for  October  15,  1875): 

"I  answer  emphatically,  No,  I  did  not;  no  man  ever  heard  me  in  any  way 
deny  the  Book  of  Mormon,  the  administration  of  the  angel  that  showed  me  the 
plates;  nor  the  organizition  of  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter  Day  Saints 
under  the  administration  of  Joseph  Smith,  Jr.,  the  prophet,  whom  the  Lord 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  105 

raised  np  for  that  purpose  in  these  latter  days,  that  he  might  show  forth  his 
power  and  glory.  The  Lord  has  shown  me  these  things  by  his  Spirit,  by  the 
administration  of  holy  angels,  and  confirmed  the  same  with  signs  following,  step 
by  step,  as  the  work  has  progressed,  for  the  space  of  fifty-three  years." 

He  further  said : 

W"I  do  say  that  the  angel  did  show  to  me  the  plates  containing  the  Book  of 
Mormon.  Further,  the  translation  that  I  carried  to  Prof.  Anthon  was  copied 
from  those  plates."  "I  do  firmly  believe  and  do  know  that  Joseph  Smith  was 
a  prophet  of  God."— Herald,  vol.  22,  p.  630. 

Before  us  is  a  letter  just  received,  written  by  Elder  Charles  Deny 
who  for  many  years  was  an  active  minister  in  the  Church  in  Eng- 
land; and  this  letter  contains  important  information  as  to  the  atti- 
tude of  Martin  Harris  toward  the  Book  of  Mormon,  when  he  was 
lecturing  in  England  against  the  evils  of  Brighamism.  It  reads : 

o  o  o  o 

"In  the  Herald  of  October  15, 1875, 1  find  a  communication  from  Martin  Harris, 
one  of  the  three  witnesses  to  the  Book  of  Mormon,  in  which  he  declares  that  he 
did  not  go  to  England  to  lecture  against  Mormonism.  That  declaration  is  true; 
but  it  may  be  interesting  to  know  what  he  went  therefor.  Not  having  a  MiUenial 
Star  by  me  of  that  date,  I  cannot  tell  exactly  the  time,  but  think  it  was  in  1846. 
My  first  wife,  (then  Anna  Stokes),  told  me  that  she  saw  him  in  Birmingham, 
in  the  Saints1  Meeting  House.  He  had  gone  there  from  this  land  to  oppose  the 
pretentious  of  Brigham  Young  and  the  Twelve,  who  were  then  laying  the 
foundations  for  polygamy  and  the  Brighamite  rule.  A  young  man  of  her  ac- 
quaintance, in  the  presence  of  the  assembly,  presented  to  him  his  testimony  with 
his  name  in  connection  with  the  other  two  witnesses'  names,  and  asked  him  if 
that  was  his  name,  Martin  replied,  'It  is.'  'Did  you  put  your  name  to  that  testi- 
mony?' Martin  answered,  ll  did;  and  that  Book  of  Mormon  is  the  Book  of  G-od. 
I  know 'more  about  that  book  than  any  man  living.'  " 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  these  three  witnesses  withdrew 
from  active  fellowship  in  the  Church  as  early  as  1838;  but  not  for 
want  of  faith  in  the  Book  of  Mormon,  or  in  the  prophetic  mission  of 
Joseph.  Some  if  not  all  of  them,  thought  the  Church  was  swerving 
from  the  right,  and  was  tending  to  apostasy.  And  it  is  probable 
that  personal  grievances  and  personal  interests  had  much  to  do  with 
them  in  shaping  their  course  toward  the  Church.  But  amid  all 
their  trials  and  afflictions,  and  though  separated  in  their  associations 
from  the  Church,  and  having  many  strong  inducements  to  abandon 
their  faith  in  the  Book  of  Mormon,  they  nevertheless  have  steadfastly 
maintained,  with  cheerful  and  earnest  zeal,  and  with  a  loving  hope 
in  God,  their  marvelous  and  highly  important  testimony.  If  they 
had  remained  in  full  and  active  fellowship  with  the  Church  and  in 
the  ministry,  it  might  have'  been  argued  that  all  their  interests  and 


106  The  Divine  Calling  of 

surrounding  influences  were  of  such  a  character  as  to  forbid  their 
turning  from,  or  retracting  their  testimony.  But  these  reasons  can- 
not now  be  assigned  for  their  steadfastness.  There  were  many 
causes  to  prompt  them  to  deny  the  work,  and  man}'  surroundings 
well  calculated  to  draw  them  away  from  the  faith ;  but  their  love  of 
God  and  his  truth,  their  sincerity  of  heart,  their  honesty  of  purpose. 
and  their  exceeding  great  knowledge  by  the  ministry  of  angels,  by 
the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  Hy  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  and  by  the 
many  wonderful  dealings  of  God  within  their  observation  and  ex- 
perience, all  united  to  render  it  morally  impossible  for  them  to 
recant  and  turn  away. 

Joseph,  Oliver,  and  Martin — their  united  testimony  lives  to-day. 
though  they  have  passed  away  to  that  God  who  gave  them  being. 
They  were  competent  and  credible  witnesses;  and  their  joint  testi- 
mony is  now  in  force.  And  David  Whitmer,  spared  of  God  for 
some  wise  and  important  end  we  trust,  is  still  a  witness  for  God.  and 
for  his  strange  and  nmrvelous  work.  Men  of  intelligence,  men  of 
integrity,  fearless  and  unflinching  men.  their  testimony  and  their 
memory  will  live  and  be  honored,  when  their  defamers  and  traducers 
will  have  gone  down  into  oblivion,  or  are  remembered  only  with 
pity  and  with  shame. 


CHAPTER  V. 

Mr.  S.  nexts  claims  that  Joseph  Smith  was  a  false  prophet,  and 
the  Book  of  Mormon  untrue,  because  they  teach  that  the  spirit 
or  soul  of  man  is  a  conscious  being,  a  living,  active  entity,  and  re- 
mains such  after  the  death  of  man.  He  says : 

'-"While  the  Bible  represents  death  as  reducing  man  to  a  state  of  unconscious- 
ness till  the  resurrection,  the  Book  of  Mormon  affirms  'that  there  is  a  space  be- 
tween death  and  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  and  a  state  of  the  soul  in  happi- 
ness or  in  misery.' — Alma,  ch.  18." 

Joseph  Smith  and  the  Book  of  Mormon  do  teach  that  the  soul  of 
man  survives  the  death  of  man.  and  that  it  exists  in  the  intermedi- 
ate state  as  an  intelligent,  active  agent,  possessing  all  the  faculties 
and  powers  peculiar  to  the  intellectual,  spiritual  part  of  man  in  this 
life.  It  is  an  exalted  and  cheering  doctrine;  one  in  harmony  with 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  10T 

the  wisdom  and  love  of  God,  while  its  opposite,  the  soul- killing  doc- 
trine, is  cheerless,  degrading,  repulsive,  and  utterly  dishonorable 
toward  God  and  man. 

The  sleep,  or  mortality  of  the  soul  or  spirit,  is  utterly  repugnant 
to  the  natural  sense,  the  common  sentiment,  and  the  universal  God- 
given  instincts  of  the  race.  For  proof  of  this  we  consult  the  history, 
poetry,  painting  and  sculpture  of  all  nations  and  ages,  and  they  all 
teach  us,  that  man,  everywhere;  during  all  past  time,  believed  the 
soul  was  a  real  substantive  being,  and  possessed  of  intense  conscious- 
ness and  activity  when  no  longer  "in  the  flesh."  The  ruins  of  an- 
cient Babylon,  and  Nineveh,  and  Thebes,  and  Memphis — with  their 
temples,  tombs,  and  monuments — open  their  stony  lips  and  proclaim 
to  us  in  their  glyphs  and  sculpturings,  how  prominent  was  this  sen- 
timent in  those  times  so  near  the  tower  of  Babel  and  the  flood.  And 
when  we  examine  the  antiquities  of  America,  the  same  kinds  of  evi- 
dence meet  us. 

All  minds,  from  the  gifted  and  cultured  Plato,  to  the  rude  savage 
of  the  forest,  have  been  thoroughly  possessed  with  this  elevating  and 
ennobling  thought,  a  thought  so  important  and  effectual  in  restrain- 
ing evil,  and  inciting  to  that  which  is  good — an  incalculable  power 
in  lifting  up  the  race  into  better  conditions  of  life  and  being.  We 
trace  this  instinctive  sentiment  in  man  as  readily  as  we  can  trace  in 
the  lower  orders  of  creation  the  instinctive  traits  peculiar  to  them. 
The  works  of  the  honey-bee,  the  spider,  the  ant,  the  beaver,  the 
swallow,  and  a  thousand  others  of  the  lower  orders,  teach  us  that 
the  Creator  has  for  wise  and  benevolent  purposes,  endowed  these 
creatures  with  knowledge,  wisdom,  and  skill  suited  to  their  wants 
and  conditions.  This  instinct  is  in  some  sense,  prophetic — revealing 
to  the  inner  consciousness  facts  and  conditions  not  known  by  actual 
experience.  Man  and  the  lower  orders  are  alike,  to  a  degree,  in 
this  respect. 

A  wise  and  loving  God  would  never  have  implanted  in  man  the 
belief — instinctively — of  a  conscious  existence  after  death  unless 
such  a  belief  had  a  basis  of  fact  in  the  divine  economy  and  was 
proper,  and  unless  such  a  state  of  existence  was  real.  As  soon  would 
he  endow  the  lower  orders  of  creation  with  instincts,  and  then  not 
provide  them  with  those  things,  circumstances,  and  conditions  to 
which  those  instincts  invariably  point  or  lead.  Inasmuch,  then,  as 
the  race  is  universally  possessed  with  this  sentiment,  (except  in 
cases  of  extreme  barbarism,  moral  degredation,  or  perverted  educa- 


108  The  Divine  Calling  of 

tion),  it  is  conclusive  that  the  sentiment  is  a  true  one,  and  that  it  is 
ordained  of  God. 

Our  experiences  in  life  are  such  as  to  prove  that  the  soul  or  spirit 
of  man  is  a  living  entity,  a  being  distinct  from  the  physical  body, 
superior  to  the  body,  and  not  dependent  upon  it  for  its  existence. 
The  soul  retains  its  perfect  identity,  its  force  and  capacity,  though 
the  body  be  wasted  with  disease,  or  deprived  of  many  of  its  mem- 
bers. 

uThe  emaciated,  consumptive  patient,  with  only  snatches  of  sleep,  toils  at 
his  intellectual  labors,  even  after  reduced  to  a  slender  diet  of  bread  and  water, 
and  with  a  vigor  of  Mind  unsurpassed  in  days  of  health  and  refreshing  enjoy- 
ments. The  whole  history  of  the  malignant  epidemic  cholera  presents  the 
Mind  as  sparkling  as  ever  in  the  midst  of  the  ruins  of  organic  life,  in  which  are 
included  the  brain  as  well  as  the  almost  pulseless  heart,  and  the  expiring  func- 
tions of  every  other  organ,  closely  representing  the  disembodied  soul." — The 
Soul  and  Instinct,  115. 

The  late  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  Michael  Kerr, 
retained  great  strength  of  intellect,  and  force  of  spirit,  until  the  im- 
mediate hours  of  death,  though  he  had  wasted  slowly  away  in  his 
physical  powers  to  a  mere  skeleton.  Of  the  late  Hon.  Wm.  Gr. 
Brownlow,  of  Tennessee,  it  is  said,  "Latterly  he  was  decrepit  to  the 
verge  of  utter  helplessness,  but  his  mind  and  temper  remained  un- 
weakened."  And  now  comes  the  Hon.  A.  H.  Stephens,  who  "has 
been  dying  for  the  last  twenty  years,"  and  who  is  as  thin  as  a  ghost, 
and,  physically,  as  helpless  as  a  child,  who,  being  wheeled  into  the 
United  States  Court  Room  in  his  invalid  chair,  in  which  he  sits,  elec- 
trifies and  astonishes  his  hearers  with  a  lengthy,  "clear,  strong,"  and 
eloquent  argument,  without  the  aid  of  manuscript  or  brief,  following 
all  the  intricate  windings  of  "the  case  with  a  hawk-like  alertness  that 
showed  his  intense  intellectual  activity."  All  this  shows  both  the 
superiority  of  the  soul  above  the  body,  and  the  fact  of  the  soul  be- 
ing a  separate  entity  and  independent  of  the  body  in  its  faculties 
and  powers. 

'•Though  our  outward  man  perish,  yet  the  inward  man  is  renewed  day  by 
day."— 2  Cor.  4:16. 

"For  when  the  body  oft  expiring  lies, 
Its  limbs  quite  senseless,  and  half  closed  its  eyes, 
The  mind  new  force  and  eloquence  acquires, 
And  with  prophetic  voice  the  dying  lips  inspires.1' 

Man  is,  in  some  sense,  an  animal  machine.  The  soul  is  that  which 
thinks,  perceives,  reasons,  imagines,  wills,  hates,  loves,  rejoices  and 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  109> 

sorrows,  hopes  and  worships — and  all  this  while  residing  within,  and 
having  intelligent  control  of  the  body.  The  soul  sustains  a  similar 
relation  to  the  body  that  the  intelligent  engineer  does  to  his  engine. 
As  the  engineer,  to  control  his  engine,  must  be  in  contact  with  it,, 
so  the  soul,  to  control  the  body,  must  dwell  within  it.  As  the  en- 
gine represents  the  body,  so  the  steam  represents  the  blood,  and  the 
intelligent  engineer  the  soul.  And  as  the  engineer  may  live  and 
have  active  being  while  his  engine  is  wrecked  and  destroyed,  so  the 
soul  of  man  may  live  when  free  from  the  body — when  "dust  returns 
to  dust  as  it  was  before,  and  the  spirit  returns  to  God  who  gave  it." 
Intelligence,  and  volition,  are  not  the  inherent  properties  of  mat- 
ter, but  they  are  of  the  soul,  and  this  demonstrates  that  the  soul  is 
above  and  superior  to  matter.  Mind  controls  matter,  and  is  capa- 
ble of  self-action  and  self-determination.  The  brain,  is  the  seat  of 
the  mind,  but  it  is  not  the  mind  itself,  as  some  would  claim.  It  is 
simply  the  organ  of  the  mind,  the  instrument  through  which  the 
mind  operates,  and  manifests  itself.  The  brain,  in  its  mental  opera- 
tions, acts  only  as  it  is  acted  upon  by  the  intelligent  soul.  The 
brain  is  the  soul's  chief  instrument;  the  body  with  all  its  parts  ren- 
dering subordinate  service. 

"In  his  lecture  on  'Does  Death  End  All?1  in  Boston,  recently,  Joseph  Cook 
used  this  illustration  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul :  lAs,  therefore,  from  the 
structure  of  the  eye  we  may  infer  the  existence  of  a  wholly  external  agent, 
light;  or  from  that  of  the  ear,  the  existence  of  a  wholly  external  agent,  sound; 
so  from  the  absolute  inertness  of  the  cerebral  structure  in  itself,  we  must  attri- 
bute its  activities  to  an  agent  as  external  to  it  as  sound  is  to  the  ear  or  light  to 
the  eye.  That  agent  is  invisible  to  the  external  vision,  and  intangible  to  the 
external  touch.  It  is  positively  known  to  consciousness,  or  the  internal  vision 
and  touch.  That  agent  is  the  soul.  As  the  dissolution  of  the  eye  does  not  de- 
stroy the  light,  the  external  agent  which  acts  upon  it,  and  as  the  dissolution  of 
the  ear  does  not  destroy  the  pulsation  of  the  air,  the  external  agent  which  acts 
upon  it,  so  the  dissolution  of  the  brain  does  not  destroy  the  soul,  the  external 
agent  which  sets  it  in  motion.1 " 

We  demonstrate  the  existence  of  the  soul  by  the  ideas  it  origin- 
ates, and  the  work  it  performs.  We  see  its  work  in  music,  poetry, 
painting,  language,  invention,  mechanic  arts,  and  in  many  other 
ways.  While  the  body  attains  perfection  in  about  from  twenty  to 
twenty-five  years,  or  earlier,  the  intelligent  soul  continues  to  improve, 
and  enlarge  its  capabilities  and  powers,  till  seventy,  eighty,  or  more 
years  pass  away,  and  this,  too,  while  the  body  is  wasting,  and  fail- 
ing in  its  natural  powers. 

The  human  mind,  or  soul,  is  evidently  constituted  after  the  pat- 


110  The  Divine  Calling  of 

tern  of  the  Divine  inind,  or  soul.  The  Infinite  Mind,  which  de- 
signed, originated,  and  constructed  the  universe  in  all  its  parts,  has 
its  counterpart  (in  its  constitutions,  though  not  in  greatness  and  ex- 
cellence) in  the  mind  of  man  which  designs,  originates,  and  achieves 
the  wonderful  works  of  art  seen  in  the  world's  history.  Inasmuch 
as  the  works  of  the  former  proclaim  His  personal  being  as  a  spirit, 
so  the  works  of  the  latter  prove  that  the  spirit  or  soul  of  man  is  a 
personal  being.  And  if  the  works  of  God  prove  the  immortality  of 
the  Mind  of  God,  why  shall  not  the  intellectual  works  of  man  prove 
the  immmortality  of  the  mind  of  man  ?  Does  not  the  spirit,  the  in- 
tellectual part  of  man,  exist  on  the  same  plan  with  that  of  the  "Fa- 
ther of  spirits?"  Who  dare  say  it  does  not?  That  the  spirit  or 
soul  of  man  is  a  real  being,  a  separate  entity,  a  self-acting  agent 
when  in  the  body  of  flesh  or  out  of  it,  is,  we  think,  just  as  reasona- 
ble, and  demonstrable,  as  that  the  "Father  of  spirits"  is  a  separate 
•entity,  a  self  acting  Being. 

Lest  some  should  think  us  irreverent  in  comparing  the  soul  of 
man  with  the  Divine  Soul,  we  will  give  them  our  scriptural  grounds 
for  doing  so : 

"Your  new  moons  and  your  appointed  feasts  my  soul  hateth.*' — Isa.  1 : 14. 
^Behold  mine  elect  in  whom  my  soul  delighteth." — Isa.  42:1.  uBe  thou  in- 
structed, 0  Jerusalem,  lest  my  soul  depart  from  thee.r — Jer.  6:  8. 

Thus  far  of  God.     Of  man  God  says : 

"Love  the  Lord  your  God  with  all  your  soul'1' — Deut.  11 : 13.  uCome  unto 
me,  and  hear,  and  }*our  soul  shall  live.'' — Isa.  55:  3. 

As  relates  to  both  God  and  man,  the  term  refers,  we  see,  to  the 
intelligent,  conscious  nature.  The  immortality  of  the  soul  may  be 
•clearly  inferred  in  its  desires  for  immortality ;  its  hopes  of  immortal- 
ity; its  instinctive  convictions  of  immortality;  its  adaptability  for 
immortality;  and,  finally,  in  its  essential  likeness  to  God. 

Who  that  has  traced  the  development  of  the  intelligent  soul  from 
the  cradle  to  the  grave,  that  has  seen  it  battle  with  the  ills  and  the  i 
obstacles  of  life,  until  it  has  won  triumphant  victories  throughout 
the  realms  of  mind  and  matter,  in  every  department  of  life,  and 
Unally,  in  its  explorations,  planted  its  conquering  standards  upon 
the  starry  plains  of  infinitude — who  that  has  seen  this  can  believe 
in  the  mortality  of  the  soul,  or  that  it  sleeps  in  unconsciousness  at 
death?  Such  a  belief  degrades  man.  and  dishonors  God,  his  Maker. 

As  such  doctrine  is  irrational,  and  unphilosophical,  so  it  is  un- 
scriptural  and  utterly  contrary  to  the  belief  of  the  chosen  people  of 


Joseph  Smitli  Defended.  Ill 

God — first  the  Jews  and  after  them  the  early  Christians.  Wherev- 
er, in  the  Old  Testament,  the  spirit,  or  soul  of  man  is  spoken  of,  it 
is  treated  as  something  distinct  and  separate  from  the  body  of  man. 
A  few  instances  shall  suffice: 

"And  it  came  to  pass,  as  her  soul  was  in  departing,  (for  she  died)  that  she  called 
his  named  Ben-oni.1' — Gen.  35:18. 

Dr.  Clarke  renders  the  Hebrew  text  of  this:  "in  the  going  away 
of  her  soul."  In  either  case  the  soul  did  not  die  with  the  body,  nor 
sleep  with  the  body.  The  conscious  activity  of  the  soul  is  here 
plainly  taught,  in  its  "departing,"  "going  away." 

Elijah  prayed : — 

"0  Lord  my  God,  I  pray  thee,  let  this  child's  soul  come  into  him  again.  And 
the  Lord  heard  the  voice  of  Elijah;  and  the  soul  of  the  child  came  into  him  again, 
and  he  revived." — 1  Kings  11 : 21,  22. 

In  this  case,  the  child's  soul  left,  or  "departed"  away,  and  at  the 
prayer  of  the  man  of  Grod  it  returned  and  "came  into  him."  The 
soul  is  here  spoken  of  as  existing  for  a  time,  at  least,  out  of  the  body ; 
and  then,  the  same  soul,  returning  "into  him."  Now,  if  the  soul 
could  exist  outside  of  the  body  from  the  time  of  the  child's  death 
till  it  was  restored,  why  not  exist  for  a  longer  time?  Aye,  forever? 
Again : 

"Behold,  all  souls  are  mine;  as  the  soul  of  the  father,  so  also  the  soul  of  the 
son  is  mine;  the  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die." — Ezek.  18:4. 

Here  we  see  the  father,  and  the  son — living  men — are  each  pos- 
sessed of  a  soul,  and  that  soul  an  intelligent,  responsible  agent — capa- 
ble of  sinning,  and  of  becoming  dead  in  sin — "in  trespasses  and  sins." 

The  inherent  nature  of  a  spirit  is  life,  activity,  intelligence.  The 
word  spirit  is  often  used  to  signify  the  same  as  soul.  This  should 
be  noticed  briefly,  at  the  least. 

uAnd  Moses  spake  unto  the  Lord,  saying,  Let  the  Lord,  the  God  of  the  spirits 
of  all  flesh,  set  a  man  over  the  congregation." — Num.  21: 15,  16. 

Here  the  dual,  or  compound  nature  of  man — flesh,  and  spirit — is 
clearly  seen.  The  term  spirit,  or  its  equivalent,  in  ancient  times 
signified  primarily,  and  generally,  a  real  substance,  though  highly 
'refined  or  sublimated,  and  not  merely  disposition,  energy,  breath,  or 
ardor.  Locke,  the  author  of  a  treatise  On  the  Human  Understanding, 
explains  it  thus : 

"Spirit  is  a  substance  in  which  thinking,  knowing,  doubting  and  a  power  of 
moving,  do  subsist." 


112  The  Divine  Calling  of 

And  it  is  clearly  of  individual,  substantive  spirits,  that  Moses 
speaks  in  the  foregoing  text.  And  the  same  may  be  said  of  the 
following. 

"But  there  is  a  spirit  in  man,'and  the  inspiration  of  the  Almighty  giveth  them 
understanding." — Job.  32:  8. 

So  of  this : 

uThe  Spirit  itself  boareth  witness  with  our  spirit,  that  we  are  the  children  of 
God."— Horn.  8:  16. 

While  the  first  "Spirit"  is  undoubtedly  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  sec- 
ond— "our  spirit" — is  as  evidently  the  intelligent  part  of  man — the 
soul.  Again : 

"For  what  man  knov;eth  the  things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of  man  which  is 
in  him  ?"— 1  Cor.  2:  11. 

Here  "the  spirit  of  man/'  is  his  intelligent  part.  And  what  is 
true  of  these  texts  is  true  of  hundreds  more.  We  have  now  learned 
from  the  Scriptures  what  part  of  man  is  conscious,  and  therefore 
responsible.  And  we  shall  pursue  our  further  investigation  from  this 
standpoint. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  understand  the  inspired  writer  when  he 
describes  the  death  of  man : 

"Then  shall  the  dust  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was;  and  the  spirit  shall  return 
unto  God  who  gave  it."— Eccl.  12 :  7. 

So  also  of  the  following  texts  : 

"Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Except  a  corn  of  wheat*  fall  into  the  ground 
and  die,  it  abideth  alone;  but  if  it  die,  it  bringeth  forth  much  fruit." — 
John  12:  24. 

As  in  the  death  of  the  seed,  the  living,  active  part  is  separated 
from  the  mere  body  that  contained  it,  and  then  passes  with  special 
activity  into  other  living,  intermediate  conditions  before  reaching 
the  same  kind  of  a  ~body  that  it  leaves;  so  also  it  is  with  the  conscious, 
spiritual  part  of  man.  Death  is  the  separating  of  the  vital,  active 
part  from  the  inert.  In  this  view  of  the  matter  the  words  of  the 
proto-martyr  Stephen  are  full  of  solemn,  cheering  significance,  and 
are  easily  understood. 

"And  they  stoned  Stephen,  [he]  calling  upon  God,  and  saving,  Lord  Jeses,  re 
ceive  my  spirit." — Acts  7:59. 

Now  Stephen  knew  where  Jesus  was,  that  he  was  at  the  right  hand 
of  God  in  heaven,  and  he  evidently  knew  his  spirit  would  survive 
his  death,  and  be  separated  from  his  body,  and  that  by  God's  grace 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  113 

it  would  go  into  the  presence  of  Jesus.     Hence  he  prayed  in  the 
manner  quoted. 

While  Jesus  told  the  wicked  Jews,  "ye  shall  die  in  your  sins; 
whither  I  go,  ye  can  not  come/'  (John  8  :  21);  yet  he  promised  his 
disciples,  "Where  I  am,  there  shall  also  my  servant  be,"  (John  12 : 
26.  And  to  Peter, — 

u Whither  I  go  thou  canst  not  follow  me  now;  but  thou  shalt  follow  me  after- 
ward."—John  13:36. 

And  for  all  his  disciples  he  prayed, — 

"Father,  I  will  that  they  also,  whom  thou  hast  given  me,  be  with  me  where 
I  am;  that  they  may  behold  my  glory,  which  thou  hast  given  me." — John 
17:24. 

This  hope  of  being  with  Jesus,  in  the  presence  of  God,  at  death, 
is  sublime,  and  very,  very  comforting.  Such  it  was  to  Paul  the 
Apostle;  and  such  it  was  to  all  the  intelligent  early  Christians.  A 
few  passages  in  Paul's  writings  may  suffice  for  the  present : 

uFor  me  to  live  is  [to  serve]  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain.  But  if  I  live  in  the 
flesh  this  [service  of  Christ]  is  the  fruit  of  my  labor;  yet  what  I  shall  choose  I 
wot  [know]  not.  For  I  am  in  a  strait  betwixt  two,  [desires],  having  a  desire 
to  depart,  [from  the  flesh],  and  to  be  with  Christ;  which  is  far  better.  Never- 
theless to  abide  in  the  flesh  is  more  needful  for  yon." — Phil.  1 : 21-24. 

The  sense  of  this  passage  is  so  manifest  that  no  lengthy  explica- 
tion is  needed.  The  question  with  Paul  was,  as  to  whether  it  were 
better,  all  things  considered,  for  him  to  "abide  in  the  flesh7'  for  the 
good  of  the  church,  or  to  die,  depart  from  the  flesh,  arid  to  be  with 
Christ,  which,  for  him,  personally,  would  be  "gain" — and,  "far 
better/'  This  sense  of  the  text  harmonizes  beautifully  with  what 
he  afterwards,  on  the  eve  of  his  martyrdom,  wrote  to  Timothy: 

"For  I  am  now  ready  to  be  offered,  and  the  time  of  my  departure  is  at  hand." 
—2  Tim.  4:6. 

So  also  does  it  with  2  Cor.  5  :  6,  8. — 

"Therefore  we  are  always  confident,  knowing  that,  whilst  we  are  at  home  in 
the  body,  we  are  absent  from  the  Lord;  *  *  *  We  are  confident,  I  say,  and  willing 
rather  to  be  absent  from  the  body,  and  to  be  preset  with  tho  Lord." 

No  amount  of  skillful  perversion  can  make  these  texts  sustain 
the  mortality,  or  the  sleep  of  the  soul  at  death,  when  that  term  is 
applied  to  the  spirit  or  sentient  part  of  man.  A  living  man  is  often 
called  a  soul,  but  a  dead  man,  never.  Hence  the  term  always  re- 
lates to  a  living  being.  Peter,  too,  taught  the  entity,  and  conscious- 
ness of  man's  spirit  after  death.  He  says : 


114  The  Divine  Calling  of 

uYea,  I  think  it  meet,  as  long  as  7  am  in  this  talernack,  [fleshly  body],  to  stir 
you  up  by  putting  you  in  remembrance;  knowing  that  shortly  I  must  put  off  this 
my  tabernacle,  [bodv],  even  as  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  hath  shewed  me." — 2  Pet. 
1:13,  14. 

The  evident  sense  of  this  is,  that  Peter,  in  his  intellectual,  spirit- 
ual nature — the  soul — lived  in  his  fleshly  body  as  in  a  "taberna- 
cle," or  house j  and  that  his  intelligent  soul  would  "put  off"  the 
fleshly  "tabernacle"  in  death,  as  Jesus  had  shewed  him.  (John  21 : 
18,  19).  To  say  that  he  would  put  it  "off"  from  his  breath,  or 
from  his  natural  life — the  blood— is  absurd;  and  to  say  that  his  soul 
or  spirit  would  remain  in  him.  asleep,  at  death,  is  to  flatly  contra- 
dict the  text.  When  persons  put  "off"  their  clothing,  they  are  the 
same  persons  they  were  when  they  had  their  clothing  on.  .So  with 
Peter,  his  "tabernacle"  was  his  mortal  clothing;  this  he  could  "put 
off"  from  his  soul,  and  did  put  off  at  his  death. 

In  another  place  Peter  teaches  the  entity  of  the  spirits  of  the 
dead,  and  their  consciousness,  when  he  says: 

"For  Christ  also  hath  once  suffered  for  sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he 
might  bring  us  to  God,  being  put  to  death  in  the  flesh,  [his  flesh],  but  quickened 
^resurrected]  by  the  Spirit,  [Holy  Spirit] :  by  which  [Spirit],  also,  he  went  and 
preached  unto  the  spirits  in  prison:  which  [spirits]  sometime  were  disobedient, 
when  once  the  long  suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  Ark 
-was  a  preparing."—!  Pet.  3: 18,  20. 

That  these  were  the  spirits  of  the  dead,  and  that  Christ  preached 
to  them  in  their  disembodied  state,  is  made  clear  from  what  follows: 

"Who  shall  give  account  to  him  that  is  ready  to  judge  the  quick  [living] 
and  dead.  For,  for  this  cause  [the  coming  judgment]  was  the  gospel  preached 
also  to  them  that  are  dead,  that  they  might  be  judged  according  to  [the  same  as] 
men  in  the  flesh,  but  live  according  to  God  [according  to  God's  laws]  in  the 
spirit"— Pet.  4:5,  6. 

Prof.  Taylor  Lewis  says: 

uWe  are  taught  that  there  was  a  work  of  Christ  in  Hades.  He  descended 
into  Hades;  he  makes  proclamation  'ekeruxen1  in  Hades  to  those  who  are  there 
*in  ward.1" — Bailey,  Discrepancies  of  the  Bible,  p.  192. 

Alford  says : 

ill  understand  these  words  to  say  that  our  Lord,  in  his  disembodied  state,  did 
go  to  the  place  of  detention  of  departed  spirits,  and  did  there  announce  his  work 
of  redemption,  preach  salvation  in  fact,  te  the  disembodied  spirits  of  those  who 
refused  to  obey  the  voice  of  God  when  the  judgment  of  the  flood  was  hanging 
over  them.11 — Ibid. 

Prof.  Hindekoper: 

"In  the  second  and  third  centuries,  every  branch  and  division  of  the  Christian 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  115 

Church,  so  far  as  their  records  enable  us  to  judge,  believed  that  Christ  preached 
to  the  departed." — Hid. 

For  further  information  in  respect  to  the  spirits  of  the  wicked 
dead  being  "in  prison/'  we  refer  the  reader  to  Isaiah  24 :  21-23, 
Zach.  9  :  11,  Ezek.  32  :  18,  21,  23,  27,  31,  32.  In  harmony  with 
these  texts  is  the  saying  of  the  Psalmist, — "The  wicked  shall  be 
turned  into  hett,  and  all  the  nations  that  forget  God." — 9  :  17.  It 
will  not  do  to  say  that  hell  is  simply  the  grave,  as  some  do;  for  that 
would  rob  the  passage  of  its  significance.  Being  " turned  into  hell," 
is  threatened  as  a  terrible  punishment,  but  decent  burial  in  the  grave 
is,  by  the  righteous,  esteemed  a  blessing.  That  the  souls  of  the 
wicked,  at  death,  go  to  "hell,"  or  the  "prison,"  is  clearly  taught  by 
the  Savior: 

"But  I  will  forewarn  you  whom  ye  shall  fear:  Fear  him,  which,  after  he  hath 
killed,  hath  power  to  cast  into  hell;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  fear  him.1' — Luke  12 : 5. 

Again : 

"And  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  beggar  died,  and  was  carried  by  the  angels 
into  Abraham's  bosom :  [presence,  society] :  the  rich  man  also  died,  and  was 
buried ;  and  in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments,  and  seeth  Abraham 
afar  off,  and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom.1' — Luke  16:22,  23. 

In  this  the  entity  of  the  spirit,  and  its  active,  and  intense  con- 
sciousness after  its  separation  from  the  body,  is  made  as  plain  as 
language  can  make  it.  To  illustrate,  and  further  confirm  the  grounds 
we  have  taken,  we  appeal  to  history.  Joseph  us  relates  of  Moses, 
that  in  his  last  address  to  his  people  he  said : 

"When  souls  are  about  to  leave  the  body,  they  speak  with  the  sincerest  free- 
dom."— Ant.  B.  4,  ch.  8. 

It  may  be  well  to  here  remark  that  Josephus  often  quotes,  from 
Moses  and  the  prophets,  such  passages  as  we  have  not  in  the  Bible. 
In  his  discourse  concerning  Hades — the  state  of  the  dead — he  says 
that  the  souls  of  the  just  dwell  in  a  peaceful,  delightful  region, 
where  "the  countenance  of  the  fathers,  and  of  the  just,  which  they 
see,  always  smiles  upon  them,  while  they  wait  for  that  rest  and 
eternal  new  life  in  heaven  which  is  to  succeed  this  region.  This 
place  we  call  The  Bosom  of  Abraham ."  This  makes  it  plain  that 
the  Jews  believed  in  the  conscious  condition  of  the  spirit  after  death ; 
and  it  enables  us  to  see  why  Jesus  used  the  term  "Abraham's  bos- 
om." The  people  to  whom  he  was  speaking  were  familiar  with  that 
term,  they  knew  its  meaning,  hence  it  was  suitable  in  describing  the 
condition  of  righteous  Lazarus,  with  the  righteous  dead. 


116  The  Divine  Calling  of 

The  Christians  of  the  first  three  centuries  believed  the  doctrine 
we  advocate.  St.  Clement  in  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
says : 

"Peter,  by  unjust  envy,  underwent,  not  one  or  two,  but  many  sufferings;  till 
at  last,  being  martyred,  he  went  to  the  place  of  gkry  that  was  due  to  him.  For 
the  same  cause  did  Paul  in  like  manner  receive  the  reward  of  his  patience. 
Seven  times  he  was  in  bonds ;  he  was  whipped,  was  stoned ;  he  preached  both 
in  the  east  and  in  the  west,  leaving  behind  him  the  glorious  report  of  his  faith ; 
and  so  having  taught  the  whole  world  righteousness,  and  for  that  end  traveled 
even  to  the  utmost  b.ounds  of  the  west,  he  at  last  suffered  martyrdom,  by  the 
command  of  the  governors,  and  departed  out  of  the  world,  and  went  unto  his  holy 
place." — Apostolic  Fathers;  Wake's  Trans,  p.  60. 

Comment  here  is  needless.  Of  the  martyrdom  of  St.  Ignatius, 
who,  it  is  claimed  succeeded  the  Apostle  Peter  at  Antioch,  it  is  said 
in  an  epistle  from  the  Church  at  Smyrna,  where  he  suffered : 

"Wherefore,  with  much  readiness  and  joy,  he  left  Antioch  and  came  to  Selu- 
cia;  from  thence  he  was  to  sail.  And  after  a  great  deal  of  toil,  being  come  to 
Smyrna,  he  left  the  ship  with  great  gladness  and  hastened  to  see  the  holy  Poly- 
carp,  his  fellow-scholar,  who  was  bishop  there;  for  they  had  both  of  them  been 
formerly  the  disciples  of  St.  John.  Being  brought  to  him,  and  communicating 
to  him  some  spiritual  gifts,  and  glorying  in  his  bonds,  he  entreated,  first  of  all 
the  whole  Church,  (for  the  churches  and  cities  of  Asia  attended  this  holy  man 
by  their  bishops,  and  priests,  and  deacons,  all  hastening  to  him,  if  by  any  means 
they  might  receive  some  part  of  his  spiritual  gift),  but  more  particularly  Poly- 
carp,  to  contend  with  God  in  his  behalf,  that  being  suddenly  taken  by  the  beasts 
from  the  world,  lie  might  appear  before  the  face  of  Christ."— Apostolic  Fathers,  p.  179. 

And  now  in  regard  to  the  martyrdom  of  Poly  carp  (the  one  alluded 
to,  historians  assert,  in  Rev.  2 : 10),  and  others  with  him: 

"Wherefore  being  supported  by  the  grace  of  Christ,  they  despised  all  the 
torments  of  the  world ;  by  the  suffering  of  an  hour  redeeming  themselves  from 
everlasting  punishment.  For  this  cause,  even  the  fire  of  their  cruel  and  barbar- 
ous executioners  seemed  cold  to  them ;  whilst  they  hoped  thereby  to  escape  that 
fire  which  is  eternal,  and  shall  never  be  extinguished ;  and  beheld,  with  the  eyes 
of  faith,  those  good  things  which  are  reserved  for  them  that  endure  to  the  end; 
lwhich  neither  ear  has  heard,  nor  eye  seen,  nor  have  they  entered  into  the 
heart  of  man.'  But  to  them  they  were  now  revealed  by  the  Lord;  as  being  no 
longer  men,  but  already  become  ANGELS." — p.  193. 

Eusebius,  in  giving  an  account  of  the  martyrdom  of  Lucius,  rep- 
resents him  as  saying  to  his  judge: 

UI  thank  thee,  for  now  I  am  liberated  from  wicked  masters,  and  am  going  to 
the  good  Father  and  King,  even  God."— Eusebius'  Eccl.  Hist.,  ch.  17. 

Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  in  the  third  century,  says  of  the 
Christian  martyrs: 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  117 

"But  these  same  martyrs,  who  are  now  sitting  with  Christ,  and  are  the  sharers  in 
his  kingdom,"  &c,  &c. —  Vide  ch.  42. 

Space  would  quite  fail  us  to  give  all  the  testimonies  of  the 
early  fathers  which  sustain  the  Bible  doctrine  of  the  conscious  con- 
dition of  the  spirits  of  the  dead.  But  we  must  not  dismiss  Eusebius 
until  we  present  his  testimony  concerning  the  "soul-sleeping"  pro- 
fessors of  those  early  days.  He  says,  chapter  37 : 

"But  about  this  time,  (A.  D.  244),  also,  other  men  sprung  up  in  Arabia  as  the 
propagators  of  false  opinions.  They  asserted  that  the  human  soul,  as  long  as 
the  present  state  of  the  world  existed,  perished  at  death  and  died  with  the  body, 
but  that  it  would  be  raised  again  with  the  body  at  the  time  of  the  resurrection." 

This  is,  identically,  the  theory  of  Mr.  S.  and  his  fellows.  Through 
the  means  of  a  large  council,  headed  by  Origen,  these  heretics  were 
prevailed  upon  to  abandon  their  "false  opinions." 

We  must  not  omit  to  quote  the  testimony  of  another  one  from 
among  the  "cloud  of  witnesses"  furnished  us  by  the  primitive  Chris- 
tians. Tertullian,  that  learned  advocate  and  unflinching  defender 
of  the  faith  of  the  early  Christians,  in  his  book,  De  Anima,  says: 

"We  had  a  right,  after  what  was  said  by  St.  John,  to  expect  prophecyings ; 
and  we  not  only  acknowledge  these  spiritual  gifts,  but  we  are  permitted  to  en- 
joy the  gifts  of  a  prophetess.  There  is  a  sister  amongst  us  who  possesses  the 
faculty  of  revelation.  She  commonly,  during  our  religious  services  on  the  Sab- 
bath, falls  into  a  crisis  or  trance.  She  has  then  intercourse  with  the  angels, 
sees  sometimes  the  Lord  himself;  sees  and  hears  divine  mysteries,  and  discov- 
ers the  hearts  of  some  persons;  and  administers  medicine  to  such  as  desire  it; 
and  when  the  Scriptures  are  read,  or  psalms  are  being  sung,  or  prayers  are  being 
offered  up,  subjects  from  thence  are  ministered  to  her  vision.  We  were  speak- 
ing of  the  soul  once  when  our  sister  was  in  the  spirit — I  do  not  recollect  exactly 
what.  After  the  service  she  allowed  the  rest  of  the  people  to  go  away,  as  she 
always  did  on  such  occasions,  and  then  communicated  to  us  what  she  had  seen 
in  her  ecstasy,  which  was  then  more  closely  enquired  into  and  tested.  She  in- 
formed us  that  she  had  seen  a  soul  in  a  bodily  shape;  that  it  appeared  to  be  a 
spirit;  but  not  empty  and  formless  and  wanting  a  living  constitution;  but  that 
its  form  appeared  so  substantial  that  you  might  touch  or  hold  it  It  was  tender, 
[delicate],  shining,  of  the  color  of  the  air,  but  in  everything  resembling  the  liu- 
inanform" — Hist.  Supernatural,  vol.  1,  p.  443. 

Tertullian,  and  also  Ireneus,  flourished  in  the  second  century;  the 
latter  being  "a  disciple  of  Poly  carp/'  Their  testimony  is  conclusive 
that  the  early  Christians  believed  that  man's  spirit  was  actively  con- 
scious after  death;  also  that  the  spirit  had  real  substance,  and  was 
in  the  general  form  of  the  body  of  man.  When  we  consider  that 
air,  light,  electricity,  magnetism,  etc.,  are  real  substances,  and  yet 
some  of  them  impalpable,  and  others  imperceptible  to  the  natural 


118  The  Divine  Calling  of 

sight,  we   may  not  doubt  that  spirits  have  substantial  existence, 
though  they  be  not  apparent  always  to  our  natural  vision. 

Doubtless  all  the  enlightened  primitive  Christians  believed  as  did 
Tertullian,  Ireneus,  Polycarp,  Lucius,  St.  Ignatius,  and  those  of  their 
times,  that  the  soul  of  man  possessed  consciousness  after  departing 
from  the  body,  and  that  it  was  in  the  form  of  the  human  body;  for 
we  find  that  the  disciples  mistook  Jesus  in  the  obscurity  of  night 
for  a  spirit : 

"And  about  the  fourth  watch  of  the  night  he  cometh  unto  them,  walking  up- 
on the  sea,  and  would  have  passed  them.  But  when  they  saw  him  walking 
upon  the  sea,  they  supposed  it  had  been  a  spirit,  [spectre]  and  cried  out." — 
Mark  6: 48,  49. 

Again,  when  Jesus  was  resurrected  from  the  dead  he  appeared, 
unannounced,  to  his  disciples  who  were  assembled  in  an  upper  room, 
that  was  evidently  but  very  dimly  lighted,  and — 

uThey  were  terrified  and  affrighted,  and  supposed  that  they  had  seen  a  spirit. 
[spectre]." — Luke  24:37. 

This  took  place  after  they  had  been  under  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
for  at  least  three  years  and  a  half;  and  it  cannot  be  claimed  that 
the  disciples  were  ignorant  and  superstitious  in  respect  to  the  exist- 
ence and  form  of  spirits,  for  those  were  topics  about  which  the 
Pharisees  and  Saducees  were  at  direct  issue,  and  were  likely  often 
discussed,  and  about  which  the  disciples  could  but  feel  deep  interest, 
as  they  were  so  intimately  related  to  their  mission — preaching  the 
gospel  of  salvation  to  all  men.  They  believed  in  the  fact  of  spirits, 
and  that  they  existed  in  the  form  of  man,  otherwise  they  would  not 
have  taken  the  living  Jesus  to  be  a  spirit.  Jesus  now  instructs 
them  somewhat  in  regard  to  spirits  when  he  said : 

"A  spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  see  me  have." — v.  39. 

The  fact  of  spirits  existing,  and  in  the  human  form,  is  here  ad- 
mitted by  Jesus;  but  they  did  not  possess,  he  said,  a  body,  or  "tab- 
ernacle," of  fash  and  bones. 

We  can  not  better  close  this  part  of  our  subject  than  by  consider- 
ing a  portion  of  the  Revelation  of  St.  John.  When  on  the  Isle  of 
Patmos,  he  was  shown  a  series  of  remarkable  events  touching  the 
interests  of  the  church,  and  among  them  the  overthrow  of  "Babylon 
the  Great,  the  Mother  of  Harlots  and  Abominations  of  the  Earth." 
Prior  to  her  complete  destruction,  and  before  the  resurrection  of  tlie 
righteous  dead,  the  following  occurs: 

"Rejoice  over  her,  thou  heaven,  and  ye  holy  apostles  and  prophets;  for  God 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  119 

hath  avenged  you  on  her.  And  a  mighty  angel  took  up  a  stone  like  a  great 
mill-stone,  and  cast  it  into  the  sea,  saying,  Thus  with  violence  shall  that  great 
city  Babylon  be  thrown  down,  and  shall  be  found  no  more  at  all." — Rev.  18 ; 
21,  22. 

Here  we  see  that  "heaven/'  and  "holy  apostles  and  prophets" 
were  called  upon  to  "rejoice  over  her;"  and  in  the  opening  verses  of 
the  next  chapter  we  get  their  response : 

"And  after  these  things  I  heard  a  great  voice  of  much  people  in  heaven^  sayingr 
Alleluia:  Salvation,  and  glory  and  honor,  and  power,  unto  the  Lord  our  God: 
for  true  and  righteous  are  his  judgments;  for  he  hath  judged  the  great  whorer 
which  did  corrupt  the  earth  with  her  fornication,  and  hath  avenged  the  blood 
of  his  servants  at  her  hand." — 19: 1,  2. 

Now,  from  what  we  have  seen  in  the  instinctive  sentiment  of  the 
race,  in  the  experiences  of  life,  in  the  teachings  of  philosophy,  in  the 
revelations  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New,  as  also  in  the  testimo- 
nies of  the  Jewish  historian,  the  early  Christians  and  martyrs,  we  are 
by  these  evidences,  great  in  amount  and  unimpeachable  in  character, 
fully  warranted  in  concluding  that  the  soul  of  man,  after  it  leaves  the 
body,  is  intensely  and  actively  conscious  and  capable;  and  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  death  of  the  soul  with  the  body,  or  the  sleep  of  the 
soul  with  the  body  at  death,  is  a  base  and  contemptible  heresy. 

Mr.  S.,  to  establish  his  soul-sleeping  theory,  distorts  and  perverts 
the  Scriptures  in  a  manner  that  clearly  evinces  the  badness  of  his- 
case.  We  will  give  a  few  instances : 

"The  living  know  that  they  must  die;  but  the  dead  know  not  any  tiling." 

This,  clearly,  has  no  reference  to  the  spirit  only,  or  the  soul  of  man, 
but  to  the  man,  composed  of  body  and  soul.  The  man  proper  being 
dead — his  body  gone  to  the  grave,  and  his  spirit  to  God — being 
disorganized,  could  not  know  any  thing.  We  might  as  well  expect 
life  and  activity  in  a  grain  of  wheat  that  has  fallen  in  the  ground 
and  died.  The  life  that  was  once  in  such  a  grain  is  now  separated 
from  it,  and  passed  into  other  conditions;  therefore  that  particular 
grain  is  dead,  and  lifeless,  but  the  life  that  was  once  in  it  is  still  in 
existence,  and  active. 

uDavid  [says  Mr.  S.]  affirms  of  the  dying  man :  'In  that  very  day  his  thoughts 
perish.1 " 

Very  good ;  a  man's  thoughts  may  perish  in  many  ways,  and  yet 
he  retains  his  power  to  think.  But  this  quotation  should  be  under- 
stood, as  relating  to  a  living  man  who  dies;  that  man  as  a  compound 
being,  body  and  spirit,  no  longer  thinks,  or  acts,  and  for  the  best  of 


120  The  Divine  Calling  of 

reasons,  because  death  has  separated  his  spirit  from  his  body.  But 
the  text  does  not  intimate  but  that  the  soul  of  that  man  may  think 
and  act.  Again  he  quotes : 

"The  dead  praise  not  the  Lord,  neither  any  that  go  down  into  silence." — Pa. 
115:17. 

This  clearly  relates  to  the  dead  body,  that  which  goes  down  to 
the  dust,  and  not  to  "the  spirit  of  man  that  goeth  upward." — Eccl. 
3:21.  Again: 

"In  death  there  is  no  remembrance  of  thee." — Ps.  6:5. 

If  Mr.  S.  had  given  the  context,  it  would  have  explained  at  once 
the  meaning  of  what  he  did  quote.  I  will  give  it: — "In  the  grave 
who  shall  give  thee  thanks."  This  completes  the  verse,  and  the 
sentence,  and  enables  us  to  better  understand  the  text.  This  text 
relates  to  the  body,  and  not  to  the  soul,  evidently.  Mr.  S.  next 
quotes  the  words  of  Job  14  :  21 : 

"His  [the  dead  man's]  sons  come  to  honor,  and  he  knoweth  it  not;  and  they 
are  brought  low,  and  he  perceiveth  it  not  of  them.11 

This,  like  the  first  texts  considered,  cannot  be  made  to  relate  to 
the  spirit  of  man,  which  goes  to  God  at  death,  but  was  doubtless  in- 
tended to  apply  to  that  part  of  man  which  goes  to  the  grave.  And 
as  for  Job,  his  teachings  between  the  beginning  of  his  afflictions  and 
their  close,  as  also  those  of  the  "three  miserable  comforters,"  whose 
words  are  so  often  quoted  by  Mr.  S.  and  his  co-religionists,  we  do 
not  accept  them  in  the  discussion  of  doctrine.  Elihu,  who  was  sent 
of  God,  to  Job,  says  of  Job,  (34 :  35),  "Job  hath  spoken  without 
knowledge  and  his  words  are  without  wisdom,"  and,  "he  [Job]  mul- 
tiplieth  words  without  knowledge,"  (35  : 16).  And  the  Lord  says 
of  Job,  "Who  is  this  that  darkeneth  counsel  by  words  without 
knowledge,"  (38  :  2).  Please  excuse  us,  Mr.  S.,  if  we  take  no  fur- 
ther notice  of  the  teachings  referred  to  in  Job. 

Mr.  S.  next  quotes: 

"And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it;  and  hell  [hades—  the  state 
of  the  dead}  delivered  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them;  and  they  were  judged 
every  man  according  to  their  works." — Rev.  20: 13. 

But  where  is  "death,"  Mr.  S.?  You  have  left  that  out;  but  we 
do  not  say  you  did  it  intentionally;  oh  no!  but  the  passage  as  you 
quote  it  is  much  better  suited  to  your  theory,  if  possible,  and  looks 
suspicious.  John  says,  "death  and  hell  delivered  up  the  dead  which 
were  in  them!1  Here  is  a  delivery  of  the  dead  from  two  places. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  121 

Plato,  the  learned  Greek,  tells  us  that  hell — hades — is  "the  world  of 
spirits,"  (Plato,  by  Pond,  p.  125).  As  Hades  is  a  Greek  word,  the 
profound  Plato  has  no  doubt  given  us  its  true  signification.  Wm. 
Smith  in  his  Diet.  Bible,  says: 

uThe  word  sheol  [Hebrew]  is  never  used  of  the  grave  proper,  or  place  of 
burial  of  the  body.  It  is  always  tlie  abode  of  spirits,  LIKE  THE  GREEK  HADES." 
— Note  on  Hell. 

This  being  true,  when  "hell  delivers  up  the  dead  which  were  in" 
it,  of  course  it  delivers  up  its  spirits.  And  this  makes  it  conclusive 
that  "death"  here  means  the  grave,  or  other  repositories  of  the  bodies 
of  the  dead.  This  renders  the  text  plain  to  the  comprehension. 

This  second,  and  last  resurrection,  is  clearly  that  of  "the  unjust;" 
for  this  is  after  the  "thousand  years,"  (vs.  3,  5,  7),  while  that  of 
the  righteous  takes  place  at  the  beginning  of  "the  thousand  years." 
(vs.  4,  5).  So  that  the  spirits  that  hell  now  delivers  up,  are  the 
spirits  of  the  wicked  dead,  "and  they  were  judged  every  man  ac- 
cording to  their  works. 

Mr.  S.  asserts  that — 

"Peter,  an  eye  witness  of  the  scene,  did  not  think  that  Moses1  spirit  was 
there,  [on  the  mount  with  Christ],  but  Moses  himself,  else  he  would  not  have 
proposed  to  build  a  tabernacle  for  Moses,  for  he  was  not  foolish  enough  to  talk 
of  building  a  tabernacle  for  a  spectre." 

The  disciples,  we  have  seen,  thought  the  resurrected  Jesus  was  "'a 
spirit,"  and  its  not  impossible  for  Peter  to  have  mistaken  the  spirit 
of  Moses  for  Moses  in  the  flesh.  Yet  we  do  not  believe  he  was  de- 
ceived at  all,  but  knew  that  the  spirit  of  Moses  was  present.  Peter 
had  more  experience  in  spiritual  things  than  Mr.  S.,  and  held  en- 
tirely different  views  in  respect  to  the  existence,  form,  power,  and 
ministrations  of  spirits.  The  dead  body  of  Lazarus  was  called  Laz- 
rus,  and  such  usage  was  and  is  common,  and  why  not  the  spirit  of 
Moses  be  recognized  as  Moses,  and  called  Moses.  Surely  the  intel- 
lectual man  is  more  worthy  to  retain  the  name  than  the  dead  body; 
yet  either  may  do  so. 

Now  Moses'  spirit  did,  evidently,  appear  with  Elias'  (or  John 
the  Baptist's)  spirit,  on  the  mount,  and  minister  to  Jesus.  That  this 
"Elias"  was  John  the  Baptist  is  seen  by  reading  the  10th  to  13th 
verses,  inclusive,  of  Matthew  17th  chapter.  After  they  had  seen 
the  vision, 

."His  disciples  asked  him,  saying,  "Why  then  say  the  scribes  that  Elias  must 
first  come?  And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them,  Elias  truly  shall  first 


122  The  Divine  Calling  of 

come,  and  restore  all  things.  But  I  say  unto  you,  That  Elias  is  come  already, 
and  they  knew  him  not,  but  have  done  unto  him  whatsoever  they  listed,  [had  behead- 
ed him].  Likewise  shall  also  the  Son  of  Man  suffer  of  them.  Then  the  disciples 
understood  that  he  spake  unto  them  of  John  the  Baptist." 

This  forever  settles  the  matter,  that  the  Elias  who  appeared  with 
Moses  on  the  mount  to  Christ  and  his  three  disciples,  was  none  other 
than  John  the  Baptist,  who  had  been  beheaded  but  a  few  months 
before.  It  was  fitting,  upon  this  august  occasion,  that  the  two  priest- 
hoods, Melchizedek  and  Aaronic,  should  be  represented  by  Moses 
and  John  the  Baptist.  Moses  had  been  dead  for  near  1500  years, 
and  John  the  Baptist  for  but  a  few  months;  the  resurrection  had 
not  yet  occurred,  therefore  it  was  the  spirits  of  these  servants  of 
God  who  now  appear  and  minister.  Here  were  "spirits  of  just  men 
made  perfect." 

But  Mr.  S.  says  this  was  "a  vision."  If  he  intends  by  this  to 
say  that  it  was  not  real,  but  merely  a  trance,  then  he  clearly  perverts 
the  sense  of  the  text.  Peter  declares  of  this  occurrence : 

"We  have  not  followed  cunningly  devised  fables  when  we  made  known  unto 
you  the  power  and  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  were  eye-uritnesses  of 
his  majesty.  For  he  received  from  God  the  Father  honor  and  glory;  when 
there  came  such  a  voice  to  him  from  the  excellent  glory,  This  is  my  beloved 
Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased.  And  this  voice  which  came  from  heaven  we 
heard,  when  we  were  with  him  in  the  holy  mount." — 2  Peter  1: 16-18. 

It  was  a  vision,  it  is  true;  and  the  first  and  most  obvious  meaning 
of  that  word  is  actual,  literal  sight.  In  this  vision  the  disciples  saw 
three  persons : 

uAnd,  behold,  there  talked  with  him  two  men,  which  were  Moses  and  Elias 
[John  Baptist] ;  who  appeared  iti  glory,  and  spake  of  his  decease  which  he 
should  accomplish  at  Jerusalem.1' — Luke  9:30,  31. 

They  saw  Jesus  literally,  for  Jesus  was  there  personally,  but  not 
more  so,  evidently,  than  Moses  and  Elias.  Now,  if  John  the  Bap- 
tist and  Moses,  in  their  spirit  state,  could  minister  on  the  mount  1800 
years  ago,  why  not  other  servants  of  God,  in  their  spirit  state,  min- 
ister to  and  for  Joseph  and  Oliver  in  this  age?  Clearly  they  could; 
but  like  Moses  and  Elias  they  could  only  appear  "in  glory,"  which 
they  did  do.  It  is  not  at  all  strange  that  the  spirits  of  the  just 
should,  on  very  extraordinary  occasions,  appear  "in  glory"  and  min- 
ister to  men  in  the  flesh;  especially  when  we  remember  that  they 
are  members  of  "the  family"  of  God  "in  heaven  and  earth,"  (Eph. 
3:15).  Paul  teaches  that  the  saints,  by  virtue  of  being  children 
of  God,  (of  "the  family  in  heaven  and  earth"),  are  brought  into 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  123 

fellowship  with  all  that  pertains  to  that  "family."     For  he  says : 

"Ye  are  come  unto  Mount  Sion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the  living  God,  the 
heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  unto  an  innumerable  company  of  angels,  to  the  gener- 
al assembly  arid  church  of  the  first-born,  which  are  written  in  heaven,  and  to 
God  the  Judge  of  all,  and  to  the  SPIRITS  of  just  men  made  perfect:'1— Heb.  12  - 
22,  23. 

John  Baptist  uwas  a,  just  man  and  a  holy"  (Mark  6  :  20).  Jesus 
commanded  his  saints  to  be  perfect,  (Matt  5:48);  and  the  means 
for  making  just  men  perfect  is  made  clear  in  2  Tim.  3 : 17,  Eph.  4  :• 
13,  Matt.  19  :  21,  Col.  1 : 27,  28,  etc.,  etc.  Just  men  are  made  per- 
fect by  gospel  means. 

The  physical  body  is  the  mortal  part  of  man ;  the  spirit — soul — 
is  the  intellectual  life,  the  active  "inner  man."  The  latter  never 
dies,  in  the  sense  of  ceasing  to  exist,  but  the  body  does.  Salvation^ 
through  Christ,  by  the  resurrection,  secures  immortality  to  the  l>ody? 
hence  Paul  says : 

uThis  corruptible  [body]  must  put  on  incorruption,  and  this  mortal  [bodyj 
must  put  on  immortality." — 1  Cor.  15:  53. 

Thus  making  man,  the  compound  being,  as  a  whole  immortal. 
The  natural  man  and  the  physical  body,  is  in  a  mortal  and  corrupr 
tible  condition ;  but  in  the  resurrection,  the  body,  the  man  as  a 
whole,  will  put  on  the  eternal  condition,  becoming  immorcal  and  in- 
corruptible. 

Mr.  S.  contemns  the  claim  of  Joseph  where  he  says  (D.  C.  110  f 
18)  that  he  could  give  ua  plainer  translation"  of  Mai.  4  :  5,  6,  than, 
that  found  in  the  common  version,  and  Inspired  Translation.  H'e 
says  Joseph  in  this  repudiates  his  own  translation.  We  have  to  re- 
mind Mr.  S.  again,  that  Joseph  did  not  profess  to  translate,  revise^ 
or  correct  every  part  of  the  Bible;  and  this  is  one  among  many  pas- 
sages that  he  did  not  translate.  Might  not  a  translator  give  "a 
plainer  translation"  of  a  passage — giving  it  in  simpler  terms,  terms- 
easier  of  comprehension  for  inexperienced  and  uncultured  mindsy 
and  yet  give  an  equally  true  translation  ?  We  think  so ;  and  we  think 
this  was  substantially  what  Joseph  intended. 


124  The  Divine  Calling  of 


CHAPTER  VI. 

Mr.  S.  quarrels  with  Joseph  and  the  Book  of  Mormon,  because  the 
latter  says  that  the  Nephites,  within  thirty  years  after  they  left  Je- 
rusalem, appointed  Nephi  their  king,  and  also  built  "a  temple  like 
unto  Solomon's;"  and  this,  too,  when  Larnan  and  some  others  were 
separated  from  them.  Among  the  first  needs  of  society  is  that  of 
government — ruling  authority — and  what  is  more  natural  than  that 
these  Israelites,  few  in  number  though  they  were,  should  seek  to 
establish  the  form  of  government  peculiar  to  their  nation,  and  the 
then  existing  nations  of  earth  ?  Nothing  could  be  more  reasonable. 
The  fewness  of  their  numbers  argues  nothing.  Many  governments, 
ancient  and  modern,  have  been  founded  with  but  a  few  persons. 
Rome,  that  great  nation  which  conquered  the  whole  known  world, 
was  founded  by  Romulus,  B.  C.  753,  and  the  few  who  were  with 
him  in  his  "small  castle  on  the  summit  of  Mount  Palatine." 

In  respect  to  the  "temple,"  nothing  could  be  more  natural,  and 
likely,  than  for  these  zealous  religionists  to  desire,  and  to  build  at 
the  earliest  practicable  moment  possible,  a  suitable  house  for  pub- 
lic worship.  And  nothing  could  be  more  likely  than  for  them  to 
build  such  a  house  "after  the  manner  of  the  temple  of  Solomon." 
They  knew  of  the  temple  of  Solomon — its  grand,  historic  associa- 
tions— they  remembered  it  with  reverent  pride  as  the  place  where 
they  had  worshipped  the  God  of  their  fathers,  and  what  is  more 
natural,  and  likely,  than  for  them  to  build  their*  first  "house  of  wor- 
ship, though  it  might  be  very  small,  and  very  rude  in  comparison, 
after  the  form,  pattern,  or  "manner,"  of  the  venerated  temple  of 
Solomon  ?  Onias,  and  the  captive  Jews  in  Egypt,  "built  [in  the 
city  of  Heliopolis]  a  temple  and  an  altar  to  God,  like  indeed  to  that 
in  Jerusalem,  but  smaller  and  poorer.  *  *  *  Onias  found  other  Jews 
like  to  himself,  together  with  priests  and  Levites,  that  there  per- 
formed divine  service." — Jos.  Antiq.,  B.  13,  ch.  3.  And  they  claim- 
ed to  do  this  in  fulfillment  of  a  prophecy  of  Isaiah : — 

uln  that  day  there  shall  be  an  altar  to  the  Lord  in  the  midst  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  a  pillar  at  the  border  thereof  to  the  Lord.  And  it  shall  be  for  a  sign 
and  for  a  witness  unto  the  Lord  of  Hosts  in  the  land  of  Egypt." — Isa.  19 : 19,  20. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  125 

These  captive  Jews,  and  the  Nephites,  were  doubtless  actuated 
by  similar  impulses,  and  prompted  by  similar  motives.  But  Mr.  S. 
says  it  was  an  "enormous  temple/'  a  "mighty  temple,"  a  temple  of 
"huge  dimensions," — and  his  statements  here  are  just  as  false  as  we 
have  found  them  in  scores  of  other  places.  Nothing  is  said,  or  inti- 
mated as  to  the  size  of  the  temple,  but  only  as  to  the  "manner," 
fashion,  or  model  of  its  construction.  "The  manner  of  the  censtruc- 
tion"  of  it  "was  like  unto  the  temple  of  Solomon;  and  the  workman- 
ship thereof  was  exceeding  fine." — 2  Nephi  4  : 3.  Again : 

"And  I  did  construct  it  after  the  manner  of  the  temple  of  Solomon,  save  it 
were  not  built  of  so  many  precious  things ;  for  they  were  not  to  be  found  upon 
the  land." — Idem 

Mr.  S.  avers  that  there  could  have  been  "a  working  force  of  only 
eighteen  men  and  boys  to  build  that  mighty  temple."  Let  us  see. 
There  were  four  families  that  went  out  in  the  exodus  of  Lehi,  viz : 

Lehi,  wife,  and  four  sons — total, 6. 

Ishmael,  wife,  and  five  daughters — total, 7. 

Ishmael's  two  sons  "and  their  families,11 — probable  total  12. 

Zoram,  Laban?s  servant, 1 . 

Making  in  all, ~2& 

Zoram  and  the  four  sons  of  Lehi  marry  the  five  daughters  of  Ish- 
mael, giving  us  nine  families  in  all,  seven  of  whom  are  young  fami- 
lies. Lehi,  soon  after  leaving  Jerusalem,  has  two  sons  born  to  him 
(1  Nephi  5  :  36),  and  after  this  some  daughters  (2  Nephi  4  : 2).  It 
is  not  improbable  that  Ishmael  had  children  born  to  him  after 
leaving  Jerusalem,  but  of  this  we  shall  not  conjecture  further. 

The  increase  of  this  company  would  naturally  be  very  rapid;  (1) 
because  seven  of  the  families  were  young,  five  of  them  very  young; 

(2)  because  their  plain,  rural  living,  would  conduce  to  fecundity; 

(3)  because  the  people  of  those  eastern  countries  and  warm  climates, 
married  young  and  reproduced  abundantly;  and,  (4)  because  the 
Israelites  took  pride,  and  religious  care  in  being  fruitful  in  family 
increase.     Marriage  in  those  warm  climates  took  place  at  as  early 
even  as  ten  years  with  females,  and  fourteen  with  males.     A  fair 
average  would  not  likely  be  above  sixteen  with  females,  and  twenty 
with  males.     It  would  probably  be  less,  especially  with  this  company 
of  Israelites,  as  all  their  surrounding  conditions  would  invite  early 
marriages.     Malthus  claims  that  one  hundred  per  cent,  is  the  nat- 
ural average  increase  of  the  race  (except  in  times  of  war,  famine,  or 
pestilence)  for  every  twenty-five  years.     But  that  is  where  commu- 


126  The  Divine  Calling  of 

nities  are  made  up  of  all  ages  from  the  infant  to  the  aged.  The  in- 
crease of  these  Nephites  should  not  be  judged  by  such  a  standard, 
for  their  situation  in  respect  to  age,  and  manner  of  life,  favored  their 
rapid  and  large  increase. 

The  four  sons  of  Lehi  would  easily  number,  themselves  and  their 
children,  in  thirty  years,  exclusive  of  deaths,  48  persons;  the  two 
sons  of  Ishmael,  themselves  included,  24  persons;  Zoram  and  family, 
12  persons;  Lehi's  two  sons,  Joseph  and  Jacob,  and  wives,  (marry- 
ing at  eighteen  years  of  age),  for  twelve  and  ten  years,  15;  total,  99. 
The  70  children  of  the  first  sons  of  Lehi,  Ishmael's  sons,  and  Zoram, 
would  give  us  in  18  years  after  the  exodus  7  new  families;  in  20 
years,  3;  in  22,  4;  in  24,  3;  in  26,  4;  in  28,  3;  in  30,  4;  or  28 
families  in  all  in  that  time;  and  the  children  of  these  families — for 
the  first  7,  35;  the  3,  12;  the  4,  12;  the  3,  9;  the  4,  8;  the  3,  6. 
Total,  82.  To  this  add  like  increase  for  the  probable  families  of  the 
"sisters"  of  Nephi,  and  we  have  at  least  twenty  more,  making  the 
total  102.  And  to  this  add  the  number  not  counted  of  the  children 
and  heads  of  the  first  two,  and  the  first  seven  families  103,  and  we 
have  a  total  of  205  persons  in  thirty  years  from  Lehi's  exodus,  less 
Lehi  and  Ishmael,  who  died,  leaving  203.  Now  if  one  fourth  of 
this  number  were  separated  from  Nephi  and  his  company  it  would 
still  leave  150.  And  if  one  third  of  them  were  children  under  ten 
years  of  age  it  would  leave  us  100  persons,  or  more,  ten  years  of  age 
and  upwards.  Now  for  a  body  of  people  like  this  to  organize  a  gov- 
ernment, in  a  simple  way,  isolated  as  they  were,  is  perfectly  reason- 
able. And  for  them,  being  Israelites,  to  call  their  ruler  a  king, 
would  be  perfectly  natural.  And  for  them  to  build  a  house  of  wor- 
ship after  "the  manner"  of  Solomon's  temple,  is  just  what  we  might 
expect  of  them.  And  as  to  their  wars  and  contentions  with  the  La- 
manites,  history  here  repeats  itself,  for  perhaps  the  thousandth  time. 
And  that  this  company  practiced  many  of  the  trades  of  civilization, 
their  tastes  and  early  experiences  would  lead,  and  their  necessities 
compel  them  to  do  so.  There  is  nothing  more  natural,  and  reason- 
able, than  all  these  things,  except  to  the  ignorant  or  wilfully  per- 
verse. 

In  controverting  his  next  subject,  that  of  the  reign  of  the  Jared- 
Ite  kings  (Ether  1:1),  Mr.  S.  makes  no  less  than  four  false  asser- 
tions. He  states,  (1)  that  there  were  but  " twenty-five  successive 
kings,"  yet  the  record  shows  there  were  twenty-nine;  the  first  king 
of  the  twenty-nine,  Orihah,  beginning  his  reign  after  the  long  and 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  127 

eventful  rule  of  the  brother  of  Jared.  This  last  with  the  "twenty- 
nine,"  makes  the  number  thirty;  though  the  brother  of  Jared  was 
not  called  a  kwcj.  See  Ether  1:1;  4:12;  and  5  : 1.  He  states, 
(2)  that  "this  last  king  [Coriantumr]  was  still  alive  under  the  reign 
of  Mosiah  the  first,  about  400  years  after  Lehi  left  Jerusalem; — the 
first  Mosiah,  who  was  visited  ~by  Coriantumr,  about  B.  C.  200." 
Nothing  is  said  in  the  Book  of  Mormon,  or  intimated  even  that  Cor- 
iantumr visited  Mosiah,  or  that  Mosiah  saw  him.  What  information 
Mosiah  obtained  in  respect  to  Coriantumr,  he  interpreted  from  ua 
large  stone"  tablet,  containing  hieroglyphics. — Omni  1 : 9,  10.  He 
states,  (3)  that  there  was  "a  space  of  2,000  years  occupied  by  the 
reign  of  twenty-six  [Jaredite]  kings;"  yet  the  record  claims  it  was 
a  space  dating  from  some  time  after  the  confusion  of  languages,  to 
about  the  time  the  Nephites  and  Zarahemlaites  came  from  Palestine 
to  America — B.  C.  600 — a  period  of  probably  not  more  than  1600 
years,  making  an  average  of  53  J  years  for  each  of  the  thirty  who  bore 
rule.  A  slight  error,  Mr.  S.,  of  400  years !  But  that  is  nothing  for  a 
man  with  such  an  unbounded  stomach  for  crooked  things  as  our  critic. 
And  this  average,  53  years,  was  not  very  long,  considering  the  great 
age  to  which  people  lived  between  the  times  of  the  flood  and  the 
time  of  Christ.  The  longevity  of  this  people  is  constantly  affirmed 
in  the  book  of  Ether,  as  also  the  protracted  reign  of  many  of  their 
kings. 

It  is  affirmed  on  good  authority  (Dr.  Mussey,  in  "Health,  Its 
Friends  and  Its  Foes'')  that  the  Arabians  of  these  modern  times 
even,  by  virtue  of  their  abstemious  habits,  and  simple  vegetable 
diet,  live  to  a  great  age — even  to  that  of  two  hundred  years,  in  some 
instances.  Goodrich,  in  his  " Universal  Traveller"  informs  us  that 
the  Peruvians  of  the  present  age  are  very  long  lived — attaining,  in 
many  instances,  one  hundred  years,  and  more,  and  that  they  retain 
their  teeth,  their  good  sight,  and  very  seldom  turn  grey.  The  lon- 
gevity of  the  Jaredites,  a  people  living  under  the  most  favorable  cir- 
cumstances, could  not  be  other  than  very  great. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  claims  that  those  who  should  occupy  the 
land  after  the  Jaredites,  would  not  do  so  till  after  the  Jaredites  were 
destroyed  (Ether  4:12);  and  that  only  their  last  king  should  live  to 
see  the  people  who  should  succeed  them  (Ether  6:2),  and  this  was 
fulfilled  when  the  first  Zarahemlaites,  as  they  were  called,  first  came 
from  Palestine  to  America  (Omni  1 : 7.  9, 10)  about  B.  C.  590  to  600. 
Mr.  S.  asserts,  in  effect,  (4)  that  Ether,  the  last  Jaredite  prophet,  writes 


128  The  Divine  Calling  of 

his  "record"  of  the  reign  of  the  kings  on  the  same  plates  used  by  the 
brother  of  Jared;  and  to  clinch  his  statement  quotes,  "He  [Ether] 
made  the  remainder  of  this  record."  Now  "this  record"  was  simply 
the  "record"  of  Ether— "the  book  of  Ether"  (Ether  1 : 1).  And 
"the  remainder  of  this  record"  was  simply  the  remainder  of  "the 
book  of  Ether"  which  followed  from  chapter  6,  par.  2. 

Because  Ether,  the  last  Jaredite  prophet,  possessed  the  "record" 
and  "interpreters"  of  "the  brother  of  Jared,"  which  record  contain- 
ed the  marvelous  things  shown  to  the  brother  of  Jared  in  the  mount, 
"which  were  forbidden  to  come  unto  the  children  of  in  en  until  after 
he  [Christ]  was  lifted  up  upon  the  cross"  (Ether  1 : 11);  because 
of  this,  Mr.  S.  pretends  that  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  false !  He 
says,  "How  came  Ether  by  the  records  several  hundred  years  before 
the  cross?"  For  the  very  good  reason  that  he  was  the  last  of  the 
Jaredite  prophets — a  prophet  of  God — and  because  he  was  not  "the 
children  of  men/'  The  term  "children  of  men"  means  the  world — 
those  who  are  not  "the  children  of  God."  A  very  wide  distinction, 
though  our  hypercritic  seems  to  not  see  it. 

We  shall,  from  this  on,  pass,  without  notice,  some  of  the  lesser  and 
more  contemptible  objections  and  quibbles  of  Mr.  S.,  lest  we  weary 
the  reader  by  introducing  them. 

Mr.  S.  finds  fault  because  the  book  of  Malachi,  as  found  both  in 
the  common  version  and  in  the  Inspired  Translation  agree,  while  the 
words  of  Malachi,  as  delivered  by  Jesus  to  the  Nephites,  are  some- 
what different.  Joseph  did  not  pretend  to  either  translate  or  correct 
the  book  of  Malachi,  except,  possibly,  in  a  few  words.  The  words 
of  Malachi,  as  found  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  (book  of  Nephi,  ch.  11), 
do  differ  from  the  common  version,  and  this  fact  proves  a  former 
assertion  of  Mr.  S.  false,  where  he  says:  "The  fact  is,  when  prepar- 
ing the  Book  of  Mormon,  our  version  was  freely  used,  with  all  its 
defects." 

These  differing  texts  are  prima  facie  evidence  that  Joseph  did 
not  copy  from  the  common  version;  and  they  furnish  a  strong  argu- 
ment in  favor  of  the  divinity  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  The  superior 
sense  of  these  differing  texts  is  always  found  in  the  Book  of  Mormon. 

Mr.  S.  next  complains  that  Moroni  saw  the  "three  Nephites," 
whereas  "Mormon  [his  father]  testified  that  they  were  taken  away 
out  of  the  land  when  he  was  fifteen  years  old."  "How,"  says  Mr. 
S.,  "could  Moroni  have  seen  them  if  they  were  not  in  the  land?" 
To  this  acute,  and  profound  question  we  reply;  (1)  Moroni  could 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  129 

scarcely  see  them  unless  they  were  in  the  land;  and  (2)  Moroni  like- 
ly saw  them  when  they  came  back  into  the  land;  for,  in  going  away, 
we  have  no  reason  to  suppose  that  they  were  prohibited  from  return- 
ing. We  hope  this  matter  will  no  longer  perplex  our  burdened 
critic. 

Another  difficulty  in  the  way  of  Mr.  S.  is  the  gathering  up  of  the 
Nephites  prior  to  their  national  destruction.  He  says  they  uwere 
gathered  from  remote  regions  in  the  short  space  of/our  years,  *  *  * 
men,  women,  and  children,  without  the  aid  of  railroads,  from  Min- 
nesota, Maine,  California,  Florida,  and  every  other  locality,  from  the 
Atlantic  to  the  Pacific,  to  the  land  of  Curaorah,  in  New  York,  all 
this,  too,  within  four  years"  Wonderful,  if  true !  But  the  record 
informs  us  that  this  Nephi — Lamanite  war  began  in  about  A.  D.  320, 
(book  of  Nephi  1:11,  with  book  of  Mormon  1:1,  2),  and  continued 
until  after  A.  I).  384,  (book  of  Mormon  3:1,  2);  a  period  of  sixty- 
four  years.  Mormon  says : 

"And  when  three  hundred  and  eighty  and  four  years  had  passed  away,  we 
.had  gathered  in  all  the  remainder  of  our  people  unto  the  land  Cumorah." — 3: 1. 

But  for  sixty-four  years  the  wars  had  been  in  progress,  the  Ne- 
phites fleeing  many  times  before  the  Lamanites,  generally,  if  not  al- 
ways, toward  the  north  and  east,  till  they  finally  reached  Cumorah. 

Similar  objections  are  raised  by  Mr.  S.  in  regard  to  the  Jaredite 
wars.  He  intimates  that  they  were  of  but  four  years'  duration,  where- 
as, they  continued  through  a  long  series  of  years,  as  any  one  may 
learn  by  reading  Ether,  chapters  5,  6,  and  the  latter  part  of  ch.  4. 

Mr.  S.  asserts  that  the  Jaredites  and  Zarahemlaites  lived  near 
each  other  "about  400  years;  and  once  the  Jaredite  flocks  made  a 
stampede  into  the  land  of  Zarahemla,"  Yes,  Mr.  S.,  into  the  land 
that  was  afterwards  "called  by  the  Nephites,  Zarahemla"  (Ether  4:4) 
just  as  you  have  called  their  lands  Minnesota,  California,  &c,  &c. 
This  account  is  in  Moroni's  abridged  record  of  the  book  of  Ether. 
Ether  1:1;  4:1;  6:1,  etc.  Hence  it  is  Moroni  and  not  Ether,  as 
you  insinuate,  who  says  the  land  afterwards,  after  the  times  of  the 
Jaredites,  "was  called  by  the  Nephites,  Zarahemla/' 

We  have  shown  on  p.  32,  that  the  Jaredites,  with  the  exception 
of  their  last  king,  were  destroyed  before  the  Zarahemlaites  came  to 
America. 

Another  difficulty  is  sought  to  be  conjured  up  as  follows: 

u And  in  the  days  of  Coriantor  there  came  many  prophets,  and  prophesied  of 
great  and  marvelous  things,  and  cried  repentance  unto  the  people,  and  except 


130  The  Divine  Calling  of 

they  should  repent,  the  Lord  God  would  execute  judgment  against  them  to 
their  utter  destruction;  and  that  the  Lord  God  would  send  forth  another  people  to 
possess  this  land{  by  his  power,  after  the  manner  which  he  brought  their  fathers.1' 
—Ether  4: 9. 

Of  this  prophecy  Mr.  S.  says: 

"Here  Joseph  makes  a  serious  blunder,  for  the  Xephites  had  been  brought 
over  the  water  about  350  JQB.TS  previously. •' 

This  is  not  true.  We  have  already  proven  on  pages  34  and  127 
that  the  Zarahemlaites  (and  the  Nephites  came  about  the  time  they 
did)  did  not  come  to  America  till  after  the  destruction  of  all  the 
Jaredites  except  their  last  king. 

Mr.  S.  claims  that  the  Book  of  Mormon  conflicts  with  the  Bible 
when  it  says,  "He  did  not  confound  the  language  of  Jared,"  (Ether 
1:1),  while  the  Bible  states,  "The  Lord  did  there  confound  the 
languages  of  all  the  earth."  It  is  said  in  the  Bible,  too,  "All  coun- 
tries came  into  Egypt  to  Joseph  for  to  buy  corn/'  (Gen.  41 : 57) ; 
"And  there  went  out  unto  him  all  the  land  of  Judea,  and  they  of 
Jerusalem,  and  were  baptized  of  him  in  the  river  Jordan,  confessing 
their  sins"  (Mark  1 :  5).  No  sensible  person  by  these  latter  texts 
understands  that  "all,"  as  used  in  them,  means  exactly,  and  absolute- 
ly, the  whole,  and  every  one,  but,  rather,  the  larger  part;  or,  a  large 
part.  The  (one)  language  of  all  the  earth  was  confused,  but  that  is 
not  to  say  but  that  certain  favored  persons  might  have  retained  their 
original  language. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  131 


CHAPTER  VII. 

*' Joseph  says,11  continues  Mr.  S.,  "  '.He  that  kills  shall  not  have  forgiveness  in 
this  world  nor  in  the  world  to  come.1 — Doc.  &  Cov.,  p.  142.  Yet,11  says  Mr.  S.r 
"we  are  told  that  Nephi,  the  hero  of  the  Book  of  Mormon,  'took  Laban  by  the 
hair  of  the  head  and  smote  off  his  head  with  his  own  sword.1 — 1  Nephi  1 : 35." 

Yes,  Mr.  S.,  this  is  all  true;  and  to  be  consistent  you  should  have 
quoted  Moses,  who  said,  "Thou  shalt  not  kill"  (Ex.  20  : 13),  and 
then  told  us  about  Samuel,  the  great  prophet,  who  "hewed  Agag  in 
pieces  before  the  Lord  in  Gilgal"  (1  Sam.  15:33).  Laban  had 
records  that  possibly  might  have  belonged  in  part,  or  in  whole,  to  the 
house  of  Lehi ;  at  least  they  were  essential  for  them  to  have  in  future 
time  and  which  they  were  authorized  of  God  to  obtain,  (ch.  1 : 20, 
23,  25).  The  killing  of  the  prisoner  Agag,  was  immeasurably  more 
condemnable  than  the  killing  of  Laban.  Laban  had  robbed  Nephi 
and  his  brethren,  and  also  sought  to  kill  him  (1  Nephi  1 : 28). 
There  were  no  such  justifying  causes  recorded  in  the  case  of  Samu- 
el as  in  the  case  of  Nephi,  for  the  record  shows  that  Nephi  slew  La- 
ban  by  direct  commandment  of  God.  And  in  respect  to  the  quota- 
tion from  Joseph,  "thou  shalt  not  kill,"  etc.,  it  is  a  part  of  a  series 
of  commandments  given  to  the  church  in  these  latter  days. 

What  might  have  been  justifiable  in  Nephi'a  time,  and  in  the 
times  of  Samuel,  may  now  be  very  condemnable.  Men  were  justified 
under  Moses'  law  in  putting  away  their  wives  for  trivial  causes;  but 
under  the  gospel  they  are  not.  The  character  of  an  act  is,  of  right, 
determined  by  the  condition  and  surroundings  of  the  one  who  per- 
forms it. 

Mr.  S.  avers  that  a  revelation  given  by  Joseph  is  false,  because  it 
says: 

"So  shall  the  knowledge  of  a  Savior  come  unto  my  people,  and  to  the  Nephites, 
and  the  Jacobites,  and  the  Josephites,  and  the  Zoramites  through  the  testimony 
of  their  fathers.11— D.  C.  2 :  6. 

Mr.  S.  says  "there  are  no  Nephites  now  in  existence,  according 
to  the  Book  of  Mormon."  They  lost  their  national  existence,  it  is 
true ;  but  a  remnant  of  them  were  to  be  preserved  forever,  (1  Nephi 


132  The  Divine  Calling  of 

4:2;  7:1,2;  2  Nephi  2  : 1,  2,  3,  4;  7:1,2;  11:6;  12:9,12). 
There  were  large  bodies  of  the  Nephites,  Jacobites,  Josephites,  and 
Zoramites — all  called  Nephites — who  dissented  from  the  Nephite 
people,  and  united  with  the  Lamanites  (Alma  21:29;  22:3). 
And  this  continued  from  time  to  time  till  the  nation  of  the  Nephites 
was  blotted  out  in  their  last  battle  (book  of  Mormon  3:3).  Large 
bodies  and  small  ones,  went  off  by  themselves,  both  by  land  and  sea 
(Alma  30  :  3,  4,  5 ;  book  of  Mormon  3  : 3,  etc.,  etc.).  In  these  var- 
ious ways  the  seed  of  the  Nephites,  Jacobites,  &c,  were  to  be,  and 
were,  preserved;  and  all  this  "according  to  the  Book  of  Mormon." 
Mr.  S.  says  the  Zion  mentioned  in  a  revelation  through  Joseph 
in  March,  1833,  D.  C.  87  : 8,  has  been  "moved  out  of  her  place ;" 
and  that  therefore  the  revelation  is  false;  for  it  states  that  "she 
shall  not  be/'  To  this  we  answer,  that  the  thing  intended,  was,  evi- 
dently, the  locality,  site,  or  place  for  the  building  up  the  city  of  Zion 
The  same  thing  is  said  in  another  revelation,  D.  C.  98  : 4 — 

;:Zion  shall  not  be  moved  out  of  her  place,  notwithstanding  her  children  are 
scattered,  they  that  remain  and  are  pure  in  heart  shall  return  and  come  to  their 
inheritances;  they  and  their  children,  with  songs  of  everlasting  joy;  to  build 
up  the  waste  places  of  Zion." 

The  meaning  in  both  revelations  is  obvious, — the  site  or  place  for 
building  up  the  city,  Zion,  should  not  be  changed.  Mr.  S.  quotes : 

"And  behold  there  is  none  other  place  appointed  than  that  which  I  have  ap- 
pointed, neither  shall  there  be  any  other  place  appointed  than  that  which  I  have 
appointed  for  the  work  of  the  gathering  of  my  saints,  until  the  day  cometh  when 
there  shall  le  found  no  more  room  for  them;  and  then  I  have  other  places  which 
I  will  appoint  unto  them,  and  they  shall  be  called  stakes." — Ibid. 

He  avers  this  is  false,  because  other  places  for  gathering  were  sub- 
sequently appointed.  Other  places  were  appointed,  but  not  until 
it  was  found  that  there  was  "no  more  room"  for  the  saints  in  or  about 
Zion,  or  in  Jackson  county,  or,  finally,  in  the  state  of  Missouri. 
For  the  saints  were  driven  by  force,  and  great  violence,  first  from 
Independence,  the  place  for  Zion,  and  then  from  Jackson  county, 
and  then,  in  December,  1838,  from  the  state  of  Missouri.  This  was 
not  done  by  "lewd  fellows  of  the  baser  sort"  alone;  but  by  lawyers, 
doctors,  judges,  editors,  county  officials,  the  clergy  (to  their  eternal 
shame),  and,  finally,  by  the  state  authorities,  sanctioned  by  state  law ! 

Bigotry,  political  ambition,  love  of  plunder,  fear  of  the  abolition 
sentiments  of  the  saints,  stimulated  and  urged  on  by  falsehood 
through  the  pulpit  and  the  press — these  things,  with  the  wicked 
conduct,  and  the  heretical  and  foolish  teachings  of  a  few  saints  were 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  133 

the  causes  in  bringing  about  the  condition  provided  for,  viz :  "when 
there  is  found  no  more  room  [in  Zion]  for  them  [saints],  *  *  *  then  I 
have  other  places  which  I  will  appoint  unto  them,  and  they  shall  be 
called  stakes."  The  saints  were  commanded  to  not  resist  evil ;  and  to 
'•be  subject  to  the  powers  that  be,"  and  to  let  "let  no  man  break^the 
laws  of  the  land,  for  he  that  keepeth  the  laws  of  God  hath  no  need 
to  break  the  laws  of  the  land." — D.  C.  53 : 5.  Therefore,  when 
driven  by  mobs,  some  of  whom  were  organized  and  officered  by  men 
holding  civil  authority,  and  by  ministers  of  religion,  and  finally,  when 
driven  by  the  sanction  and  order  of  state  authority,  certainly  there 
was  "no  more  room"  in  Zion  for  the  Saints.  The  evils  of  Brigham- 
ism,  and  other  isms  that  have  sprung  off  in  the  apostasy  from  the 
original  faith  and  doctrine  of  the  church,  are  but  the  legitimate 
fruit  of  the  desperation  to  which  many  were  forced  in  the  numerous 
persecutions  and  drivings  of  the  saints  either  sanctioned  or  winked 
at  by  the  civil  authorities — town,  county,  state,  and  national — in 
Missouri,  and  in  Illinois.  These  authorities,  when  they  in  any  man- 
ner encouraged  these  persecutions,  and  when  they  did  not  faithfully 
seek  to  prevent  such  things,  and  to  punish,  adequately,  those  con- 
nected with  them,  "they  sowed  the  mind!"  and  they  may  blame 
themselves  when  they  "reap  the  whirlwind ! !"  Their  treatment  of  the 
saints  drove  thousands  of  the  honest,  confiding  ones,  into  the  blind- 
ing, bitter  bondage  of  priestcraft,  and  thrust  them  under  the  influence, 
and  into  the  very  jaws  of  "devouring  wolves,"  so  that  but  "few"  of 
that  old  stock  will  stand,  or  remain  to  receive  an  inheritance  in  the 
original  Zion. 

In  order  to  make  the  revelations  quoted  conflict  with  the  revela- 
tion of  1841,  in  respect  to  building  up  Zion  in  Missouri,  Mr.  S. 
quotes  but  part  of  a  clause  of  the  latter  revelation,  thereby  pervert- 
ing its  sense.  The  entire  clause  reads : 

It  beliooveth  me  to  require  that  work  [of  building  the  city  and  temple  in  Zi- 
on, Missouri,]  no  more  at  the  hands  ofthose  sons  of  men" — D.  C.  107: 15. 

But  this  garbler  quotes  it,  "will  require  that  work  no  more;" 
leaving  out,  we  see,  the  concluding  and  qualifying  part  of  the  clause. 
Such  is  the  pious  (?)  method  of  this  man  who  boastfully  promises 
to  dig  Mormonisni  iip  by  the  roots ! 

He  finds  fault  because  the  formula  of  words  used  in  baptism,  as 
found  in  the  Doctrine  and  Covenants, — "Having  been  commissioned 
of  Jesus  Christ,  I  baptize  you,"  &c.,  is  different,  in  letter,  from  that 
found  in  the  Book  of  Mormon — book  of  Nephi  5:8,-— "Having  au- 


134  The  Divine  Calling  of 

thority  given  me  of  Jesus  Christ,  I  baptize  you,"  £c.  The  sense  of 
the  two  passages  is  identical.  The  latter  form  was  given  eighteen 
hundred  years  ago,  to  the  Nephites;  while  the  other  is  given  in  this 
century  to  the  church  of  the  Saints.  What  a  prodigious  evidence 
that  Joseph  is  a  false  prophet ! 

Mr.  S.  says  "it  is  a  well  authenticated  fact  that  Christ  was  born 
several  years  before  the  vulgar  Christian  era  began."  And  he  ar- 
gues therefrom  that  the  commandment  is  false  which  says : 

"The  rise  of  the  Church  of  Christ  in  these  last  days,  being  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  thirty  years  since  the  coming  of  our  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus  Christ 
in  the  flesh."— D.  cf.  17:1. 

If  the  reckoning  of  Mr.  S.  should  by  any  means  prove  true,  still 
the  revelation  would  not  be  false;  for  it  would  be  1830  years,  and 
more;  but  1830  years  at  any  rate.  It  is  not  a  well  authenticated 
fact,  chronologically,  that  Christ  was  born  four  years  before  A.  D.  1. 
The  time  of  his  birth  is  still  a  disputed  point.  Scaliger  says,  "to 
determine  the  day  of  Christ's  birth  belonged  to  God  alone,  not  man. 
(Types  of  Mankind,  p.  666).  Says  Dr.  Moshiem: 

"The  year  in  which  it  happened  has  not  hitherto  been  ascertained,  notwith- 
standing the  deep  and  laborious  researches  of  the  learned.  There  is  nothing 
surprising  in  this,  when  we  consider  that  the  first  Christians  labored  under  the 
same  difficulties,  and  were  divided  in  their  opinions  concerning  the  time  of 
Christ's  birth."—  Church  Hist ,  part  1,  ch.  3,  1. 

In  D.  C.  45  :  3-10,  is  a  revelation  as  to  what  Jesus  said  to  his  dis- 
ciples on  the  Mount  of  Olives  in  respect  to  the  calamities  coming 
upon  the  Jews,  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  the  end  of  the  world, 
etc.;  and  in  the  llth  paragraph  it  is  said  to  Joseph  and  others, 
"behold  I  say  unto  you,  it  shall  not  be  given  unto  you  to  know  any 
further  concerning  this  chapter,  (Matt.  24),  until  the  New  Testament 
be  translated."  Mr.  S.  thinks  this  promise  has  failed.  Let  any 
one  read  the  Inspired  Translation,  and  they  will  find  a  vast  amount 
of  added  information  concerning  the  subject  matter  of  that  chapter, 
especiall  yin  Luke  17th  and  21st  chapters;  also  in  Mark  13th  and 
Matthew  24th  chapters. 

Of  the  revelations  given  by  Hiram  Page  concerning  the  order  of 
the  Church,  the  building  up  of  Zion  and  other  matters,  Mr.  S.  en- 
quires :_, 

"Why  had  not  Hiram  just  as  good  a  right  to  write  from  a  stone  as  Joseph 
had?  And  if  Satan  could  deceive  Hiram  through  a  stone,  why  could  he  not  de- 
ceive Joseph  in  the  same  way?" 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  135 

We  reply,  (1)  that  it  was  utterly  contrary  to  the  established  or- 
der of  the  Church  for  any  but  those  who  were  called  of  God  to  that 
special  work,  to  receive  revelations  and  commandments  touching  the 
law  and  general  order  of  the  Church.  This  may  seen  by  consulting 
D.  C.,  sec.  19,  a  revelation  given  to  the  Church  at  the  very  time  the 
Church  was  organized.  Joseph,  alone,  was  called  to  that  work. 
The  case  of  Aaron  and  Miriam,  where  they  usurped  the  prerogc- 
tives  of  Moses,  is  right  in  point.  See  Num.  12  : 1—8.  They  erred 
greatly  in  seeking  to  get  into  Mosses'  place.  Hananiah  usurped 
the  special  calling  of  Jeremiah — Jer.  1 :5-10,  with  ch.  28.  Satan 
deceived  Hananiah,  moving  him  to  supplant  Jeremiah.  There  is 
specific  order  in  the  government  of  God's  church,  as  is  seen  in  the 
cases  cited,  and  as  may  be  further  seen  by  consulting  Gal.  2 : 12, 
with  acts  15:19,  28,  etc.,  etc.  Hiram  violated  the  provided  order 
of  the  Church;  and  seeking  the  office  of  another,  he  was  in  a  condi- 
tion to  be  deceived  by  Satan.  When  persons  attempt  to  officiate  in 
the  things  of  God,  when  not  properly  called  and  set  apart  to  that 
work,  they  are  serving  the  wicked  one,  and  are  in  a  condition  to  be 
easily  deceived.  We  reply,  (2)  that  Satan  could  not  deceive  Joseph 
in  the  same  way  he  did  Hiram,  first,  because  Joseph  had  great  ex- 
perience in  the  spiritual  things  of  God,  and  had  witnessed  much 
of  the  cunning  wiles  of  Satan  during  the  seven  or  eight  preceding 
years;  and  in  the  next  place,  the  Lord  will  not  call  a  person  to  the 
specific  work  of  receiving  revelations  and  commandments  for  his 
church,  and  then  permit  him,  if  he  is  faithful,  to  be  deceived  by 
Satan  so  as  to  receive  and  give  to  the  church  false  revelations.  God 
has  promised  to  be  with,  and  protect,  and  preserve,  his  ministry,  on 
the  grounds,  of  course,  of  their  faithfulness  in  their  own  calling  and 
office.  A  counterfeiter  can  not  impose  his  spurious  notes  on  the 
skillful,  experienced,  and  faithful  cashier  on  whose  bank  the  notes 
are  drawn,  but  he  may  upon  the  inexperienced,  the  unwary,  the 
officious  and  conceited. 

Mr.  S.  says,  "  Joseph  and  Oliver  differ  in  their  testimony  concern- 
ing the  statement  of  the  angel  at  their  ordination."  That  is  true; 
but  it  consists  in  omissions.  Joseph  omits  in  his  statements  some 
things  mentioned  by  Oliver,  and  Oliver  omits  some  things  mention- 
ed by  Joseph,  yet  their  testimony  is  essentially  the  same.  They 
can  not  be  charged  with  collusion.  Furthermore,  they  do  not  differ 
near  so  widely  as  do  the  evangelists  in  respect  to  the  teachings  of 


136  The  Divine  Calling  of 

Jesus,  or  as  does  Paul  in  respect  to  his  own  conversion.  Acts  22  : 
6-16;  26:13-18. 

He  inquires :  "And  if  the  priesthood  had  been  lost  so  long,  why 
was  it  not  restored  before?"  For  the  very  good  reason  (1)  that  the 
world  was  not  prepared  for  it  before.  The  religious  intolerance, 
and  the  priestly  despotism  that,  by  the  sanction  and  aid  of  civil 
rulers,  had  so  long  held  the  world  under  their  blinding  and  tyrannical 
sway,  had  to  be  subdued  in  part,  or  be  removed,  ere  such  a  work 
could  be  accomplished.  Civil  and  religious  liberty  must  be  firmly 
established  before  it  was  practicable,  if  indeed  possible.  The  Re- 
formers did  good  work  in  preparing  the  way,  but  it  remained  for 
"free  America/'  which  is  pledged  to  protect  and  defend  the  religion- 
ist of  every  creed  and  belief,  to  be  raised  up  to  an  honored  and  com- 
manding position  among  the  nations  before  "the  dispensation  of  the 
fulness  of  times"  could  be  successfully  ushered  in.  It  required  pe- 
culiar conditions  in  national  and  religious  matters,  under  which  to 
begin  the  sojourn  in  Egypt,  the  exodus  of  Israel,  the  return  from 
the  "seventy  years'  captivity/'  and  especially  the  order  of  the  "new 
covenant,"  under  Jesus  and  his  Apostles.  And  in  the  latter  days 
proper  conditions  must  be  had  in  civil  and  religious  affairs  ere  the 
priesthood  could  be  restored,  and  God's  "marvellous  work  and  a 
wonder"  be  begun.  We  reply,  (2)  that  it  was  not  restored  before, 
because  it  was  not  so  appointed  of  God. 

Mr.  S.  next  inquires :  "Would  the  world  have  gone  to  ruin  if 
Joseph  had  died  in  his  infancy?"  And  to  this  we  reply,  "would 
the  world  have  gone  to  ruin  if  John  the  Baptist  had  died  in  his  in- 
fancy ?  God  will  judge  all  men  according  their  light  and  their  works. 
The  Lord,  "'whilst  he  is  no  respecter  of  persons,"  does  respect  the 
works  of  men,  "to  give  unto  every  man  according  to  his  ways,  and 
according  to  the  fruit  of  his  doings,"  (Jer.  IT  :  10),  whether  he  has 
heard  the  gospel  or  not.  The  almsdeeds,  the  justness,  the  piety  and 
godly  reverence  of  Cornelius,  the  heathen  man,  pleased  the  Lord, 
and  called  forth  the  angel  from  the  heavens  in  order  that  this  man 
and  his  house  might  be  brought  nigh  to  God,  and  made  partakers 
of  gospel  salvation  in  its  fulness  and  perfection. 

The  Lord  will  finally  judge  all  men.  and  "give  every  man  accord- 
ing as  his  work  shall  be,"  (Rev.  22 : 12),  whether  John  the  Baptist, 
Joseph  Smith,  or  even  Mr.  S.  had  died  in  their  infancy. 

Mr.  S.  seeks  to  make  capital  out  of  a  revelation  to  0.  Cowdery 
in  April.  1829,  relative  to  his  translating.  The  Lord  had  said  to 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  137 

him  in  the  preceding  revelation  that  if  he  sincerely  desired  it,  and 
was  very  faithful,  he  should  "receive  a  knowledge  concerning  the 
engravings  of  the  old  records  *  *  *  by  the  manifestation  of  my 
[God's]  Spirit ;  yea,  behold  I  will  tell  you  in  your  mind  and  in  your 
heart  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  shall  come  upon  you,  and  which 
shall  dwell  in  your  heart.  Now,  behold  this  is  the  Spirit  of  revela- 
tion."— D.  C.  7  : 1,  2. 

The  promise  to  him  was,  not  that  he  should  have  the  Urim,  but 
that  he  should,  if  he  complied  with  the  specified  conditions,  receive 
knowledge  "of  the  old  records"  by  "the  Spirit  of  revelation"  in  his 
"mind"  and  in  his  "heart." 

uHis  word  was  in  my  heart  as  a  burning  fire  shut  up  in  my  bones." — Jer. 
20:9. 

The  next  revelation  informs  us  that  he  failed  to  comply  with  the 
said  conditions,  and  therefore  failed  to  translate.  Peter  failed  in 
his  faith  and  therefore  sank.  (Matt.  14  :30,  31). 

Mr.  S.  thinks  that  if  Joseph  did  not  have  the  plates  immediately 
before  him  when  he  was  translating  them,  (as  stated  by  D.  Whitmer 
to  a  Chicago  Times  reporter,  in  August,  1875),  he  had  no  need  to 
have  dug  them  up.  We  do  not  question  but  what  God  might  have 
revealed  the  contents  of  the  plates,  through  his  Spirit,  as  easily  as  to 
reveal  any  other  secret  thing;  but  this  was  not  done.  Undoubtedly 
God,  in  his  wise  Providence  considered  it  far  better  that  the  plates 
should  be  obtained,  and  kept  at  hand,  and  seen  and  handled  by  many 
chosen  and  reliable  witnesses,  and  then  exhibited — the  same  plates 
— by  the  angel  of  God  to  David  Whitmer,  Oliver  Cowdery,  Martin 
Harris,  with  Joseph,  while  the  voice  of  the  Lord  out  of  heaven  tes- 
tified to  the  fact  and  truthfulness  of  their  translation  by  Joseph. 
This  course  multiplies  and  strengthens  the  evidences  relating  to  the 
truly  wonderful  matter. 

Mr.  S.  tells  us  that  "there  are  a  few  Mormons  who  repudiated 
the  revelations  of  Joseph,  and  yet  cling  to  the  Book  of  Mormon, 
thinking  that  Joseph  was  all  right  when  he  translated,  and  aposta- 
tized before  giving  the  conflicting  revelations."  We  are  not  aware 
of  any  Saints  who  profess  to  repudiate  all  Joseph's  revelations. 
There  are  a  very  few  who  repudiate  his  revelations  after  about  1833, 
when  they  claim  he  fell  and  lost  his  gift.  And  there  are  a  great 
many  who  in  practice  repudiate  his  revelations  to  the  Church,  the 
most  prominent  and  numerous  of  whom  are  the  Utah  Mormons. 

We  do  not  believe,  with  Mr.  S.,  that  "he  was  used  alternately  by 


138  The  Divine  Calling  of 

the  Lord,  and  by  the  Devil, — by  the  Lord  to  translate,  and  at  this 
same  time  by  the  Devil  to  give  revelations." 

"The  story  of  engraving  such  a  large  book  as  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon on  such  a  small  number  of  plates  as  Joseph  pretended  to  find, 
is  preposterous/'  avers  Mr.  S.  He  says  that  the  language  in  which 
the  plates  were  written  is  "claimed  to  be  a  little  less  than  the  He- 
brew," "the  elaborate  Hebrew."  These  statements  are  not  true. 
What  the  Book  of  Mormon  states  is  this : 

"If  our  plates  had  been  sufficiently  large,  we  should  have  written  in  Hebrew.17 
— Mormon  4:8. 

The  plates  were  written  in  characters  called  among  the  Nephites 
"the  reformed  Egyptian."  Ibid.  The  Egyptian,  proper,  combines 
in  style  the  ideographic,  and  the  phonetic;  and  is  very  comprehen- 
sive. Mr.  S.  thinks  that  one  page  of  their  language  could  not  make 
more  than  three  pages  of  English.  He  thinks  this  a  very  great  dif- 
ference in  the  languages,  and  seeks  to  invalidate  Mr.  Smith's  pro- 
phetic mission,  and  the  Book  of  Mormon  on  this  hypothesis.  Now, 
if  he  proposes  to  prove  Joseph  a  false  prophet  because  so  large  an 
amount  of  information  is  contained  in  so  small  a  space  as  would  be 
afforded  by  the  plates,  why  not  be  consistent  and  convict  another 
translator  on  similar  grounds? — "Jtfcwe,  Mene,  Peres" — three  small 
words  were  translated  by  the  prophet  Daniel  (5  : 26-28)  "God  hath 
numbered  thy  kingdom  and  finished  it.  Thou  art  weighed  in  the 
balances,  and  art  found  wanting.  Thy  kingdom  is  divided,  and 
given  to  the  Medes  and  Persians."  The  first  words  have  thirteen 
letters,  and  the  latter  one  hundred  and  thirty-one.  Here  is  more 
than  ten-fold  difference !  There  may  have  been  even  a  wider  differ- 
ence than  this  between  the  "reformed  Egyptian"  and  the  English. 

In  the  book  of  Omni  1 : 7,  it  is  said : 

"The  people  of  Zarahemla  came  out  from  Jerusalem  at  the  time  that  Zedeki- 
ah,  King  of  Judah,  was  carried  away  captive  into  Babylon." 

They  are  mentioned  also  in  Mosiah  11:8,  Helaman  2 :  27,  and 
3:6.  In  the  two  last  cited  places  we  are  informed  that  with  this 
people  came  "Mulek,"  a  son  of  King  Zedekiah,  not  "a  leader"  of 
the  colony,  as  Mr.  S.  asserts,  but  simply  a  member  of  that  colony. — 
Nephi,  reasoning  with  the  people,  said, 

'•"Will  ye  say  that  the  sons  of  Zedekiah  were  not  slain,  all  except  it  were  Mu- 
lek? Yea,  and  do  ye  not  behold  that  the  seed  of  of  Zedekiah  are  with  us,  and 
they  were  driven  out  of  Jerusalem  ?" 

Mr.  S.  tells  us  this  account  can  rot  be  true,  for  the  reason,  he 


Joseph  Smith  Defended. 


claims,  that  all  the  sons  of  Zedekiah  were  killed  by  the  King  of  Baby- 
lon. It  is  true  that  it  is  stated,  2  Kings  25  :  7,  and  Jer.  39  :  6,  that 
"they  slew  the  sons  of  Zedekiah  before  his  eyes;"  yet^this  does  not 
render  it  impossible  for  one,  or  even  more  of  his  sons  to  have  been 
spared.  Josephus  informs  us  that  he  had  many  wives.  He  likely 
had  many  sons.  Pharaoh  commanded  the  Hebrew  midwives  to  slay 
all  the  sons  born  to  the  Israelites,  yet  in  the  providence  of  Grod 
Moses  was  secretly  saved.  An  Egyptian  historian,  recording  that 
slaughter,  and  not  knowing  of  the  escape  of  Moses,  would,  unquestion- 
ably, have  stated  that  all  the  doomed  innocents  were  slain.  Jewish 
historians  are  distinguished  for  their  florid,  poetic,  and  exaggerative 
style  —  a  style  lacking  the  nice  precision,  and  fulness  of  detail,  that 
distinguishes  the  historian  of  Greece,  and  Home,  and  the  enlightened 
nations  of  these  later  centuries.  For  instance,  Josephus  tells  us 
that  "when  Cestius  had  marched  from  Antipatris  to  Lydda,  he  found 
the  city  empty  of  its  men,  for  thi  whole  multitude  were  gone  up  to 
Jerusalem  to  keep  the  feast  of  tabernacles;  yet  did  he  destroy  fifty 
of  those  that  showed  themselves,  and  burnt  the  city."  —  Wars,  B.  2:19. 
"The  whole  multitude  were  gone"  "yet  did  he  destroy  fifty  of  those 
that  showed  themselves.  Paul,  in  Colossians  1  :  23,  says  the  gospel 
"was  preached  to  every  creature  which  is  under  heaven"  Yet  this 
could  have  been  strictly  true  of  only  a  part.  Daniel  prophecies  that 
the  third  kingdom  in  the  succession  from  Babylon,  the  Macedonian, 
"shall  bear  rule  over  all  the  earth'7  (Dan.  2  :  39),  yet  there  were 
large  portions  of  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa,  to  say  nothing  of  Amer- 
ica, over  which  the  Macedonian  kingdom  did  not  bear  rule.  Mr. 
Newton,  in  his  works,  p.  192,  makes  these  judicious  remarks,  which 
we  submit  for  the  information  of  Mr.  S.  and  his  admirers: 

"General  prophecies,  like  general  rules,  are  not  to  be  understood  so  strictly 
and  absolutely,  as  if  they  could  not  possibly  admit  of  any  kind  of  limitation  or  ex- 
ception whatever.  *  *  *  The  prophets  exhibit  a  general  view  of  things,  with- 
out entering  into  the  particular  exceptions.  It  was  predicted  that  'Canaan  should 
be  a  servant  of  servants  unto  his  brethren,'  and  generally  his  posterity  were  sub- 
jected to  the  descendants  of  his  brethren  ;  but  yet  they  were  not  always  so  ; 
upon  some  occasions  they  were  superior." 

And  this  rule  applies  with  greater  force  to  history,  as  our  quota- 
tions prove.  These  thoughts  are  presented,  and  these  quotations 
rnade,  that  we  may  be  guarded  against  putting  too  great  exactitude 
and  precision,  upon  passages  where  the  writer  thereof  did  not  intend 
it.  That  the  King  of  Babylon  killed  the  sons  of  Zedekiah  before 
his  eyes,  we  do  not  doubt;  yet  to  believe  the  Bible  we  must  believe 


140  The  Divine  Calling  of 

that  at  least  one  (Mulek)  was  saved  from  that  fate.  \Ve  turn  to  the 
"more  sure  word  of  prophecy/'  and  by  that  we  learn  that  the  Lord, 
very  shortly  before  Zedekiah  and  his  family  were  taken  captive, 
made  promise  through  his  prophet  Ezekiel,  in  respect  to  the  seed  of 
Zedekiah : 

"Thus  saith  the  Lord  God;  I  will  also  take  of  the  highest  branch  of  the  high 
cedar,  and  will  set  it:  I  will  crop  off  from  the  top  of  his  young  twigs  a  tender  one, 
and  will  plant  it  upon  a  high  mountain  and  eminent:  In  the  mountain  of  the 
height  of  Israel  will  I  plant  it"— Ezek.  17 : 22,  23. 

"The  highest  branch  of  the  high  cedar1'  clearly  relates  to  the  then 
reigning  king  of  Judah,  which  was  Zedekiah  (as  "the  highest  branch 
of  the  cedar/'  of  verse  3,  related  to  king  Jehoiachin).  And  "his 
young  twigs/'  as  clearly  relates  to  the  king's  seed.  And,  "a  tender 
one"  "from  the  top  of  his  young  twigs/'  can  only  mean  the  most  em- 
inent one  of  his  seed.  And  when  the  Lord  says,  "7  will  also  take 
of  the  highest  branch  of  the  high  cedar,  and  will  set  it;  I irill 
crop  off  from  the  top  of  his  young  twigs  a  tender  one,  and  will 
plant  it"  etc.,  etc.,  it  can  only  mean  that  the  Lord,  in  some  special 
and  extraordinary  way,  will  take  "a  tender  one"  of  King  Zede- 
kiah's seed,  and  will  establish  it,  and  nurture  it,  in  a  superior 
place — "a  high  mountain  and  eminent" — in  some  land  that  belongs 
to  Israel  (not  Judah).  This  prophecy  must  have  its  fulfillment; 
but  it  could  not  if  the  claim  of  Mr.  S.,  that  all  Zedekiah's  sons  were 
slain,  was  true.  The  Book  of  Mormon  affords  to  this  an  easy  and 
rational  solution;  otherwise  it  would  be  an  insuperable  difficulty. 
It  must  be  fulfilled  in  a  manner  like  that  claimed  by  the  Book  of 
Mormon;  and  America  being  the  land  of  Israel,  as  claimed  by  the 
Book  of  Mormon,  and  as  is  shown  by  prophetic  blessings  (Glen.  49 : 
22-26;  48: 15-21;  Deut.  33: 13-17),  it  was  fitting  to  describe  this 
choice  land  as  being  "a  high  mountain  and  eminent  *  *  *  the  moun- 
tain of  the  height  of  Israel."  Mr.  S.  says  that  Joseph  got  himself 
"in  a  trap,"  when  stating  that  one  of  Zedekiah's  sons  came  to  Amer- 
ica. If  Joseph  had  "copied  from  the  common  version,  with  all  its 
defects,"  as  averred  so  often  by  Mr.  S.,  he  certainly  would  not 
have  said  that  one  of  Zedekiah's  sons  came  to  America.  Neither 
would  Mr.  Spaulding  have  said  so,  had  he  written  the  book.  The 
book  he  claimed  to  translate  does  make  such  claim,  and  Ezekiel's 
prophecy  sustains  it;  thus  confirming  the  truth  of  the  book,  the  di- 
vinity of  Joseph's  mission,  and  catching  Mr.  S.  in  the  trap  he  laid 
for  others. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  141 

Mr.  S.  is  horrified  at  the  idea  that  God  should  prepare  a  "compass," 
or  "directors/'  to  guide  Lehi  and  his  family,  yet  he  professes  to  be- 
lieve that  God  provided  a  beautiful  star  to  guide  the  wise  men  to 
him  that  was  "born  King  of  the  Jews"  (Matt.  2  : 1,  2,  9,  10).  He 
says  "the  story  about  the  interpreters,  or  stone  spectacles,  is  too  mar- 
velous for  credence;"  yet  he  can  easily  believe  that  Joseph  had  a 
silver  cup  through  which  he  obtained  revelations  (Gen.  44 : 5),  and 
that  the  Urim  was  a  means  of  revelation  also  (Num.  27  :  21;  1  Sam. 
28  : 2).  He  says  "the  story  of  Ether's  stone  candles  overtaxes  mar- 
velousness;"  yet  he  readily  believes  that  the  "'pillar  of  cloud  by 
day,  and  the  pillar  of  fire  by  night"  attended  Israel  in  their  exodus; 
and  that  "cloven  tongues  like  that  of  fire"  sat  upon  the  disciples 
(Acts  2:3);  and  that  unconverted  Saul  "saw  in  the  way  a  light 
from  heaven,  above  the  brightness  of  the  sun,"  shining  about  him- 
self and  those  that  journeyed  with  him  (Acts  26:13).  He  shud- 
ders at  the  thought  that  Nephi  and  Lehi,  missionaries  whose  lives 
were  endangered  by  enemies,  "'were  encircled  about  with  a  pillar  of 
fire"  (Helaman  2:18);  yet  he  can  take  in  at  one  gulp  the  three 
Hebrew  children  and  the  fiery  furnace  (Dan.  3  : 19-27);  and  with 
credulous  gaze  can  see  Elijah  go  up  into  heaven  "by  a  whirlwind," 
attended  by  "a  chariot  of  fire,  and  horses  of  fire"  (2  Kings  2  : 11). 

Bible  miracles  he  rather  likes,  but  those  from  any  other  direc- 
tion he  cannot  and  will  not  believe,  because  they  are  not  fashion- 
able,  probably;  and  because  they  have  not  the  sanction  of  his 
modern  c^eed  of  unbelief  in  the  word  of  God.  Such  clear  sight- 
ed people  as  our  critic  can  see  that  miracles  are  easy  to  be  believed 
if  they  are  only  the  ones  done  two  thousand  years  ago  and  ten  thou- 
sand miles  away,  and  related  in  their  Bible;  but  any  thing  outside 
of  that  should  be  belittled,  belied,  and  branded  as  an  imposture. 
We  are  forcibly  reminded  of  the  ancient  Pagans;  they  could  easily 
believe  all  the  miracles  imputed  to  their  deities,  but  the  miracles  of 
the  early  Christians  were  spurious!  The  Jews  could  believe  in  the 
miracles  wrought  among  their  forefathers,  but  the  miracles  of  Jesus 
and  his  disciples  were  either  impositions,  or  were  done  by  Belzebub. 
Mr.  S.  would  not  for  the  world  question  but  what  Elisha  made  the 
axe-head  to  swim  (2  Kings  6:6);  and  that  Jesus  wrought  a  mira- 
cle in  order  to  pay  poll-tax  for  himself  and  Peter;  but  no  miracles 
must  be  wrought  in  bringing  out  to  America  a  righteous  colony, 
nor  in  sustaining  them  when  here  !  The  sun  standing  still  at  the 


142  The  Divine  Calling  of 

behest  of  Joshua  is  all  right  with  Mr.  S.,  but  Israelites  on  this  con- 
tinent must  make  no  claim  to  miracles. 

"Hush,  hush,  my  son/'  said  the  pious  old  lady  to  her  idolized 
sailor-boy,  as  he  related  to  her  that  among  the  wonders  there  were 
flying-fish  in  the  sea,  "don't  impose  on  your  old  mother,  and  try  to 
fool  her  with  any  of  your  big  sailor  yarns ;"  but  when  he  told  her, 
in  solemn  tones,  that  their  vessel's  anchor  dragged  up  one  of  the  ver- 
itable chariot  wheels  of  old  Pharoh,  lost  in  the  Red  Sea,  she  exclaimed 
with  reverential  awe,  "La's  a  me !  and  did  you  bring  the  precious 
relic  home?"  Some  people  will  spurn  any  truth,  if  it  conflicts  with 
their  creeds  and  traditions. 

Orson  Pratt  describes  the  body  of  the  plates  from  which  the  Book 
of  Mormon  was  translated  as  being  about  eight  inches  long,  seven 
inches  wide,  and  six  inches  thick;  which  would  contain  336  cubic 
inches.  Mr.  S.  thinks  gold  plates  to  this  amount  would  weigh  "near 
200  pounds."  Here,  as  usual,  he  goes  wide  of  the  truth.  A  body 
of  solid  gold  of  such  dimensions  and  of  such  quality  as  needed  would 
not  weigh  near  so  much ;  and  a  body  of  finely  and  elaborately  en- 
graved plates  of  such  dimension  would  weigh  far  less;  probably 
much  less  than  100  pounds. 

Mr.  S.  now  has  another  fearful  spdl  about  the  "interpreters." 
He  seems  as  rabid  at  the  thought  of  them  as  a  mad  dog  at  the  sight 
of  pure,  cool  water.  For  information  we  refer  him  to  pages  28-34 
and  71,  84,  where  we  have  already  disposed  of  that  matter. 

He  thinks  the  story  of  the  utter  extermination  of  the  Jaredite 
nation  on  this  continent  is  too  marvelous  for  credence ;  and,  so  of  the 
Nephites.  He  admits  that  an  intelligent  class  of  people  dwelt  on 
this  continent  at  one  time,  but  claims  that  it  was  "prior  to  the 
great  deluge  I"  He  says  further:  "The  many  traces  of  an  early 
settlement  date  back  to  that  dispensation!"  Humboldt.  Josiah 
Priest,  Stephens,  Baldwin,  Delafield,  and  many  others  who  have 
studied  the  antiquities  of  America  never  dreamed  of  the  sweeping 
method  of  this  genius  from  Broadhead  I  What  a  pity  they  had  not 
met  and  consulted  this  prodigy  of  invention !  and  that,  too,  before 
they  had  spent  so  much  time  and  money  in  elaborating  their  theories. 
The  idea  that  Mr.  S.,  who  never  saw  any  of  these  antiquities,  and 
whose  ignorance  on  these  matters,  he  now  so  plainly  exhibits,  the 
idea,  I  say,  that  he  should  oppose  his  opinions  to  those  of  the  most 
renowned  antiquarians  and  scientists  of  the  age,  makes  him  slightly 
ridiculous.  Mr.  Delafield  has  furnished  the  world  with  an  Aztec 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  143 

Map  which  outlines  the  route  of  those  who  came  and  settled  in  Mex- 
ico and  Central  America,  and  this  puts  the  settling  of  America  this 
side  the  Deluge.  The  Mexicans,  and  Peruvians,  with  many  of  the 
Indian  tribes,  and  many  of  the  islanders  of  the  Pacific,  have  a  well 
defined  tradition  of  the  Flood,  but  these  all  locate  the  flood  before  the 
building  up  of  these  great  cities  and  roadways  that  so  abound  in 
America.  Mr.  Delafield  assures  us  that  the  style  of  architecture  seen 
in  these  ancient  ruins  is  clearly  Egyptian.  He  also  assures  us  that 
there  are  striking  analogies  between  the  ancient  languages  of  Amer- 
ica, and  those  of  Asia — the  Egyptian  and  Hindoo,  especially.  And 
further,  that  there  are  strong  analogies  in  the  religious  notions  of 
the  ancient  Americans,  and  the  Asiatics,  as  seen  in  their  traditions, 
their  sculpturing,  their  religious  symbols,  etc.  He  likewise  tells  us 
that  their  style  of  hieroglyphics  bears  a  striking  resemblance  to  the 
Egyptian.  How  exactly  this  accords  with  the  claims  of  the  Book 
of  Mormon,  where  it  says,  in  no  less  than  three  different  places,  that 
the  Nephites  wrote  in  Egyptian,  the  reformed  Egyptian. —  1  Nephi 
1:1;  Mosiah  1:1;  book  of  Mormon  4:8.  Delafield  further  remarks, 
that  Mexican  astronomy,  with  its  divisions  of  time  based  thereon, 
are,  in  many  leading  respects  identical  with  that  of  Egypt.  At  this, 
Latter  Day  Saints  are  not  surprised,  for  they  know  by  the  Book  of 
Mormon  that  two  colonies  of  intelligent  Israelites,  who  could  not  be 
otherwise  than  well  acquainted  with  the  then  prevailing  system  of 
astronomy  of  Egypt,  came  to  this  land  600  years  B.  C.  and  grew  into 
mighty  nations.  Mr.  Delafield  claims  that  in  all  the  analogies  dis- 
covered, as  also  in  tradition  that  they  have  "positive  evidence  of  an 
early  identity  between  the  aboriginal  race  of  America  and  the  south- 
ern Asiatic  and  Egyptian  family." — Antiquities  of  America,  p.  51. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  asserts  that  America  was  settled  by  two  dis- 
tinct peoples ,  at  two  very  remote  periods  of  time;  the  Jaredites  com- 
mencing their  settlement  some  2150  or  2200  years  before  Christ, 
and  continuing  over  a  period  of  from  1500  or  1600  years  to  the  ex- 
odus of  Lehi,  and  Mulek  and  his  company,  B.  C.  600,  when  the  Ne- 
phites and  Zarahemlaites  succeeded  them  and  continued  for  1000 
years,  and  were  themselves  succeeded  by  the  Lamanite  nation.  It 
represents  the  Jaredites,  and  the  Nephites,  as  being  highly  skilled 
in  the  arts  and  sciences  of  civilized  life.  Now,  Baldwin,  in  his 
"Ancient  America,"  pp.  155, 156,  264,  271,  etc.,  confirms  this  view. 
He  says  "these  old  constructions  [ruins]  belong  to  different  periods 


144  The  Divine  Calling  of 

in  the  past,  and  represent  somewhat  different  phases  of  civilization/' 
So  say  other  authors. 

This  theory  of  Mr.  S.,  like  many  other  of  his  positions,  lacks  the 
essential  elements  of  truth,  and  common  sense;  and  when  these  bub- 
bles are  pricked  they  collapse,  and  leave  a  blot  on  the  record  of  him 
that  created  them. 

Mr.  S.  thinks  that  Amos,  the  son  of  Amos,  could  not  have  kept 
the  records  for  so  long  a  time  as  is  claimed;  neither  Ammaron,  his 
brother.  Holy  men  of  old  lived  to  great  ages.  Abraham  begat  a 
son  when  he  was  one  hundred  years  old.  Moses,  when  he  died, 
aged  one  hundred  and  twenty  years,  was  in  the  full  vigor  of  life. 
Ezra,  and  Daniel,  and  many  others  of  God's  worthies  lived  to  be 
very  old,  and  their  habits  of  business  followed  them  to  their  latest 
years.  Mr.  S.  labors  hard  to  make  the  record  claim  that  Amos  and 
Ammaron  were  aged  respectively  150  and  160  years.  This  method 
of  perversion  is  a  favorite  trick  with  him.  Amos  2d  might  have 
been  less  than  130  years  old  at  his  death,  and  Ammaron  no  older  as 
will  appear  on  examining  the  record. 

Golour  M'Crain,  of  the  Isle  of  Jura,  who  died  in  the  reign  of 
Charles  I.,  of  England,  was  over  180  years  old.  Thomas  Parr  died 
in  A.  D.  1635,  aged  153  years;  and  James  Bowles,  of  Killingworth, 
in  1656,  aged  152  years;  and  Lady  Eccleston,  Ireland,  in  1691, 
aged  143  years.  In  A.  D.  1588,  Jane  Britten  died,  in  Somerset, 
England,  aged  200  years;  and  J.  Forathe,  Glamorganshire,  A.  D. 
1621,  aged  180  years.  Joseph  Crele,  of  Caledonia,  Wisconsin,  died 
in  1866,  aged  140  years. — Haydn,  Diet.  Dates.  These  are  a  few 
from  the  very  many  cases  of  longevity  since  the  times  of  Christ.  So 
the  great  ages  of  Amos  and  Ammaron  are  not  highly  improbable,  as 
Mr.  S.  pretends. 

Of  the  brass  plates  brought  out  from  Jerusalem,  (1  Nephi  1 :46, 
47,  48;  Alma  17  : 5),  Mr.^S.  says: 

"If  these  imfound  brass  plates  are  yet  to  be  seen  by  all  nations,"  etc. 

There  is  no  promise  that  they  were  to  be  "seen"  by  all  nations; 
but  only  that  their  contents,  in  part,  or  in  whole,  were  to  go  to  all 
nations.  And  that  is  being  fulfilled,  in  part,  by  the  circulation  of 
the  Book  of  Mormon;  for  it  is  made  up,  in  a  measure,  of  facts  con- 
tained on  those  plates. 

Mr.  S.  thinks  it  contrary  to  the  belief  and  teachings  of  the  saints 
that  Alma  (Mosiah  11 : 22)  should  be  born  of  the  Spirit  (or  have 
his  sins  pardoned,  as  he  puts  it)  before  baptism  by  water.  Nothing 


Joseph  Smitli  Defended.  145 

more  strange,  Mr.  S.,  than  the  case  of  Cornelius,  as  treated  on  p.  51. 
God  may  pardon  peoples'  sins  before  baptism,  and  give  them  the 
Spirit  in  great  power,  also;  yet  it  is  out  of  the  ordinary  course.  The 
Lord  increased  the  widow's  oil  and  meal  (1  Kings  17  : 14),  but  that 
is  not  the  common  way  for  him  to  supply  the  wants  of  the  needy. 

He  cavils  about  the  commandment  concerning  candidates  for  bap- 
tism, where  it  says : 

"All  those  who  humble  themselves  before  God  and  desire  to  be  baptized  and' 
truly  manifest  by  their  works  that  they  have  received  [of]  the  Spirit  of  Christ  unto 
the  remission  of  their  sins,  shall  be  received  by  baptism  into  his  Church." — D.~ 
C.  17:7. 

Mr.  S.  leaves  out  the  word  q/1,  inclosed  in  brackets,  when  quoting j* 
and  then  says: 

"Here  the  reception  of  the  Spirit  and  remission  of  sins  is  made  a  prerequisite 
to  baptism." 

Not  quite  so  fast,  Mr.  S.;  a  man  may  receive  of  a.  cup  of  wine, 
and  still  not'  receive  the  cup.  Receiving  "of  the  Spirit  of  Christ  unto 
the  remission  of  sins,"  means,  simply,  receiving  that  which  leads,  or 
moves  toward  that  condition.  The  words  to  and  unto  are  synony- 
mous. A  man  may  start  to  New  York,  and  yet  never  get  there. 

Mr.  S.  says: 

"The  Mormon  doctrine  of  baptism  by  proxy — baptizing  the  living  for  the 
dead — establishes  the  doctrine  of  salvation  without  repentance  on  the  part  of 
the  sinner." 

This  is  not  true,  and  Mr.  S.  knovss  it  is  not  the  doctrine  of  the 
Saints.  The  doctrine  and  belief  of  some  of  the  Saints  is  that,  as 
the  spirit  of  man,  after  death,  is  active  and  capable,  and  that,  as  the 
judgment  of  the  wicked  dead  does  not  take  place  till  after  their  res- 
urrection, there  is  in  this  fact  strong  presumptive  evidence  in  favor 
of  the  idea  that  the  spirits  of  the  wicked  dead  are,  in  the  interme- 
diate state,  placed  under  reformatory  influences.  The  statement  in 
Isaiah  24  :  21, 22,  that  the  "prisoners"  shall  "be  visited,"  "after  many 
days;"  and  the  statements  (1  Peter  3:18-20;  4:5,  G)  that  disobe- 
dient spirits  shall  be  preached  to  in  the  prison,  treated  on  p.  114; 
with  other  texts,  among  them  Jonah  (2 : 1-4)  give  ample  grounds 
for  believing  that  sinners,  except  those  of  the  highest  degree,  may 
hear  the  gospel  in  the  world  of  spirits,  and  repent.  And  it  is  for 
this  class  that  baptism  is  to  be  administered  by  proxy.  And,  as  for 
baptism  for  the  dead,  why  did  Paul  speak  of  it  as  though  practiced 
in  the  Church,  if  it  was  not  so  practiced? — 


146  The  Divine  Calling  of 

uElse  what  shall  they  do  which  arc  baptized  for  the  dead,  if  the  dead  rise  not 
at  all."— 1  Cor.  15:29. 

Now  it  will  not  do  to  say  that  "the  dead"  here  spoken  of  is  the 
dead  Christ,  as  some  do;  for  here  "the  dead"  is  from  the  Greek,  ne- 
kron  and  is  a  plural  noun.  Besides,  it  is  historically  true  that  such 
a  practice  was  had  in  the  days  of  the  first  Christians.  And  yet  this 
is  not  a  fundamental  doctrine — a  formally  authorized  doctrine — of 
the  Church  of  the  Saints. 


ENDLESS  PUNISHMENT. 

Mr.  S.  strives  to  make  a  conflict  in  the  teachings  of  our  standard 
works  in  respect  to  endless  punishment.  He  argues  that  when  a  per- 
son suffers  "endless  punishment/'  "eternal  punishment,"  "everlasting 
punishment,"  "eternal  torment,"  etc.,  he  necessarily  suffers  that 
punishment — torment — eternally,  in  the  most  absolute  and  extended 
sense  of  that  term.  Now  the  Book  of  Mormon,  like  the  Bible,  uses 
the  words  eternal,  forever,  everlasting,  endless,  etc  ,  to  signify  lengthy 
periods,  but  not  always  absolute,  unending  duration.  And  this  is 
especially  true  when  describing  punishment.  See  2  Nephi  1:4; 
Mosiahll:22;  Alma  17:2;  book  of  Mormon  4 : 6,  etc.  Exodus 
12:14,  17,  24;  Lev.  25:46;  Num.  18:8;  1  Sam.  3:13;  Isa.  34: 
10;  Amos  1:11;  Jonah  2:6;  Gen  17:8;  48:4;  49:26;  Lev. 
16  : 34;  Hab.  3:6;  1  Tim.  1  : 14.  The  "everlasting  punishment" 
mentioned  in  Matt.  25  : 46,  it  is  held  by  the  most  eminent  scholars 
of  the  primitive  church,  and  also  of  the  present  times,  to  mean  pun- 
ishment during  a  period,  the  age  to  which  it  relates.  They  inform 
us  that  olam,  Hebrew,  is  the  same  in  sense  and  meaning  as  aionias, 
Greek,  and  that  both  ordinarily  signify  age  or  life;  and  sometimes 
an  indefinite  period.  Now  the  sentiments  advocated  in  D.  C.  18 : 
1,  2,  about  which  Mr.  S.  makes  such  an  ado,  are  similar  to  those 
just  noticed.  "Endless  punishment,"  is  treated  of  in  the  revelation 
cited  as  a  condition  into  which  persons  may  be  placed,  and  from 
which  they  may  be  delivered.  This  is  the  sum  of  the  matter.  The 
meaning  of  a  word,  and  the  signification  of  a  sentence,  can  only  be 
determined  by  what  is  directly  connected  with  it.  Of  this  Mr.  S. 
seems  quite  oblivious. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  147 

THREE  HEAVENS. 

He  says  Mahomet  had  seven  heavens  while  Joseph  teaches  three 
kingdoms  in  the  future  world.  Well,  Paul  (2  Cor.  12:2)  tells  of 
"the  third  heaven ;"  and  inasmuch  as  there  is  "the  third  heaven/' 
there  must  be  the  first,  and  the  second.  He  also  tells  us,  in  describ- 
ing the  resurrection  of  the  dead  (1  Cor.  15  :41,  42),  that 

"There  is  one  glory  of  the  sun,  another  glory  of  the  moon,  and  another  glory 
of  the  stars :  for  one  star  differeth  from  another  star  in  glory.  So  also  is  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead." 

Joseph  and  Paul  agree,  only  Joseph  calls  those  conditions  king- 
doms, while  Paul  calls  them  glories.  The  departments,  or  conditions, 
are  the  same,  yet  described  under  different  forms  of  speech.  God 
has  promised  to  judge  all  men  according  to  their  works  (Rev.  22: 
12;  Rom.  2:6;  14:12;  Rev.  20:12,  13;  Matt.  16:27,  etc.,  etc.), 
and  has  promised  that  the  faithful  Saints  shall  be  with  Christ 
(John  17  :  24;  14  : 3;  1  Thess.  4  : 16, 17)  and  that  they  shall  be  like 
<7An^(Uohn3:3;  1  Cor.  15: 49;  Phil.  3  : 21;  Col.  3:4;  Rom.  8: 
16,  17);  they,  then,  possessing  the  same  glory,  or  heavenly  condi- 
tion with  Christ,  who  will  occupy  the  two  lesser  glories?  Evidently 
those  whose  "works"  under  the  equitable  and  gracious  judgment  of 
God,  render  them  meet  for  them. 

Joseph  the  seer  teaches  that  men's  rewards  or  future  condition, 
will  vary  as  their  "works"  shall  vary;  and  that,  too,  even  among 
sinners.  John  teaches  (Rev.  22  : 14,  15)  that  while  "they  that  do 
his  [Christ's]  commandments"  "have  right  to  the  tree  of  life,  and 
may  enter  in  through  the  gates  into  the  city,"  yet  that  "without  [/. 
e.,  on  the  outside  of  the  city]  are  dogs,  and  sorcerers,  and  whore- 
mongers, and  murderers,  and  idolaters,  and  whosoever  loveth  and 
maketh  a  lie."  We  should  be  glad  that  after  suitable,  though  ter- 
rible punishment,  there  is  something  better  than  eternal  sleep,  or 
annihilation,  for  even  them  who  love  and  make  lies !  In  these  teach- 
ings Joseph  and  John  are  identical.  Jesus  says: 

"All  manner  of  sin  and  blasphemy  shall  be  forgiven  unto  men:  [on  their  re- 
pentance, evidently] :  but  the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  not  be 
forgiven  unto  men.  And  whosoever  speaketh  a  word  against  the  Son  of  Man, 
it  shall  be  forgiven  him ;  but  whosoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it 
shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  the  world  to  come" — 
Matt.  12:31,  32. 

The  plain  inference  from  this  passage  is,  that  "in  the  world  to 
come,"  all  sins  except  the  one  may  be  forgiven.  Here,  then,  are 


148  The  Divine  Calling  of 

three  testimonies  agreeing,  essentially,  in  the  same  ideas.  The  doc- 
trine held  by  Mr.  S.  and  others,  that  all  who  do  not  profess  Christian 
faith  in  this  present  life  are  doomed  to  an  absolutely  endless  sleep, 
or  endless  torture,  is  as  horrid  and  hateful,  as  it  is  irrational  and  un- 
scriptural.  Those  who  can  see  nothing  better,  should  not  boast  of 
their  insight. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


BOOK  OF  MORMON. 

Mr.  S.  quarrels  with  the  idea  that  Psalm  85:11,  is  applied  in 
proof  of  the  coming  forth  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  He  says  "the 
Book  of  Mormon  did  not  -spring'  out  of  the  earth,  but  was  simply 
dug  out."  How  profound !  Webster  says  spring  means  "to  proceed," 
"to  issue/'  "to  issue  into  sight  or  notice."  And  this  is  precisely 
true  of  the  coming  forth  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  He  also  quar- 
rels with  the  application  made  of  Isaiah  29th  chapter  in  proof  of  the 
Book  of  Mormon.  He  says  the  passage:  "And  the  vision  of  all  is 
become  unto  you  as  the  words  of  a  book  that  is  sealed,  which  men 
deliver  to  one  that  is  learned,  saying,  Read  this,  I  pray  thee,"  was 
not  fulfilled  in  connection  with  the  Book  of  Mormon,  because  only 
Martin  Harris  delivered  them  to  the  learned  man.  But  Mr.  S. 
should  bear  in  mind  that  Joseph  was  a  party  to  this  delivering  "the 
words  of  a  book  that  is  sealed"  to  Mr.  Anthon,  just  as  much  as 
Solomon  was  a  leading  party  in  building  the  temple,  though  doing 
none  of  the  mechanical  work.  "Men"  did  deliver  "the  words  of  a 
book  that  is  sealed"  to  the  "learned;"  for  Joseph  sent  Martin  for 
this  very  purpose. 

He  says  Jesus  applied  verse  13  "to  the  Jews  in  his  day."  Yes, 
but  he  did  not  claim  it  had  its  final  fulfillment  there  and  then.  The 
13th  verse  fitted  their  case  and  condition,  but  only  in  part.  Peter 
accommodates  Joel  2  : 28-32,  to  the  day  of  Pentecost,  yet  it  was  not 
finally  fulfilled  on  that  occasion.  This  practice  was  frequent  with 
the  Apostles.  "Out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my  son,"  (Matt.  2  : 15), 
was  applied  to  the  bringing  of  Christ  out  of  Egypt;  but  primarily 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  149 

it  related  to  the  calling  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt  (Hosea  11:1).  This 
is  one  specimen  out  of  many  that  might  be  cited.  Newton  remarks, 
in  his  work  on  the  fulfillment  of  prophecy,  that  "many  prophecies 
of  Scripture  have  a  double  meaning,  literal  and  mystical,  respect  two 
events,  and  have  a  two-fold  completion." — P.  71. 

Mr.  S.  says  "the  'vision  of  all/  verse  11,  had  then  (in  the  days  of 
Christ)  become  to  the  Jews  like  a  sealed  book,  that  could  not  be 
read  by  the  learned,  or  the  unlearned — instead  of  one  that  could  be 
read  by  the  unlearned  Joseph/'  But  Mr.  S.  should  remember,  what 
is  fatal  to  his  logic,  viz.,  that  "the  words  of  the  book"  would  be  read; 
for  in  verse  18  it  is  said: 

"And  in  that  day  shall  the  deaf  hear  the  words  of  the  book,  and  the  eyes  of  the 
blind  shall  see  out  of  obscurity,  and  out  of  darkness." 

So,  we  see,  "the  words  of  a  book  that  is  sealed"  would  be  uttered, 
and  heard — hence  "read."  And  when  Isaiah  predicts  that  the 
"learned"  could  not  read  "the  words"  of  the  book  that  was  sealed, 
it  was  equivalent  to  predicting  that  its  language  was  such  as  he 
could  not  read.  For  it  was  not  "the  book,"  that  he  was  requested 
to  read,  but  "the  words  of"  a  sealed  book.  Isaiah  predicts  that  "the 
words"  of  the  sealed  book  should  be  delivered  by  "men"  to  the 
"learned"  and  this  was  done  by  Joseph  and  Martin,  to  Mr.  Charles 
Anthon,  Professor  of  languages  in  Columbia  College,  N.  Y.  So  pre- 
cise is  the  prophecy,  and  so  exact  its  fulfillment. 

That  Isaiah  29th  chapter,  4th  to  24th  verses,  did  not  have  their 
fulfillment  in  the  days  of  Christ,  nor  near  to  that  time,  but  that  they 
were  to  be  fulfilled  in  these  latter  days,  is  made  conclusive  from  the 
following  facts :  Firstly,  In  the  the  days  of  Christ  there  was  no 
"book,"  neither  "the  words  of  a  book  that  is  sealed,"  that  was  given 
to  the  "learned"  or  the  "not  learned."  The  Jewish  people  had  pos- 
sessed "Moses  and  the  prophets"  many  centuries  before  the  coming 
of  Christ,  the  New  Testament  was  not  compiled  and  pronounced  ca- 
nonical till  the  third  Council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  397,  and  the  first 
book  of  that  compilation  (Matthew)  was  not  written  till  between  A. 
D.  50  and  A.  D.  60.  These  books,  then,  or  any  part  of  them,  can 
not  be  "the  book"  or  "the  words  of  a  book  that  is  sealed;"  therefore 
this  prophecy  did  not  have  its  fulfillment  in  the  times  of  Christ1; 
and,  consequently,  the  immediate  context  could  not  have  been  ful- 
filled then. 

Secondly,  It  is  said  in  the  17th  verse: 


150  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"Is  it  not  yet  a  very  little  while  and  Lebanon  shall  be  turned  into  a  fruitful 
field,  and  the  fruitful  field  shall  be  esteemed  as  a  forest?'' 

Here  a  highly  important  truth  is  declared  in  an  interrogatory  form, 
— "Is  it  not  yet  a  little  while?"  meaning,  simply,  that  it  would  be 
but  a  little  while  after  the  events  mentioned  in  the  preceeding  verses 
had  transpired,  until  "Lebanon  shall  be  turned  into  a  fruitful  field, 
and  the  fruitful  field  shall  be  esteemed  as  a  forest."  That  this  term, 
Lebanon,  means  the  same  as  in  Jer.  22  :  23,  Ezek.  17  : 3,  2  Chron. 

25  : 18,  Zech.  11:1,  etc.,  viz.,  the  land  of  Judea,  is,  we  think,  quite 
plain.     It  certainly  relates  to  a  land,  that,  prior  to  the  change  prom- 
ised, had  been  barren  and  desolate.     For  it  is  to  be  "turned  into  a 
fruitful  field;"  and  yet  it  shall,  after  this  change,  for  a  time  at  least, 
be  "esteemed  as  a  forest" — an  uncultivated  and  unimproved  tract  of 
land.     Now  the  land  of  Judea,  soon  after  the  time  of  Christ,  be- 
came desolate  and  barren,  as  predicted  by  the  servants  of  God,  Lev. 

26  :  33-43;   Deut.  28  :  24;    29  :  22,  23;   Ezek.  36  :  3-6,  33,  34; 
Dan.  10:27,  etc.,  etc.,  but  soon  after  the  coming  forth  of  the  "book 
that  is  sealed,"  it  is  to  be  restored  from  its  barren  and  unfruitful 
condition,  a  change,  the  very  opposite  of  that  which  took  place  soon 
after  the  time  of  Christ.     It  is  a  fact,  of  which  all  may  inform  them- 
selves, that  in  this  nineteenth  century,  and  since  A.  D.  1827 — the 
time  the  Bo«k  of  Mormon  was  revealed — the  land  of  Judea — Leb- 
anon— has  been  turned  into  a  state  of  great  fertility  and  fruitfulness. 
Its  "former  and  latter  rain"  have  been  restored,  the  latter,  for  the  first 
time  with  regularity  for  many  centuries,  in  the  fall  of  1852.     As  a 
result,  this  land  so  long  barren  and  desolate,  is  bringing  forth  in  its- 
ancient  strength  and  fertility  wherever  the  hand  of  enterprise  and 
tilth  is  applied.     Here,  then,  are  incontestible  proofs  that  the  proph- 
ecy indicated  did  not  have  its  fulfillment  in  the  time  of  Christ,  but 
that  in  these  days  it  is  having  a  most  wonderful,  literal,  and  glori- 
ous accomplishment. 

Thirdly,  In  the  twenty-second  verse  it  is  predicted : 

"Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord,  who  redeemed  Abraham,  concerning  the 
house  of  Jacob :  Jacob  shall  not  now  be  ashamed,  neither  shall  his  face  now  war 
pale." 

From  this  we  learn,  that  at  the  time  Lebanon  is  turned  into  a 
fruitful  field— after  the  coming  forth  of  the  "book  that  is  sealed" — 
the  "house  of  Jacob,"  including  the  Jews,  of  course,  would  be  found 
in  a  highly  favored  condition — "Jacob  shall  not  now  be  ashamed, 
neither  shall  his  face  now  wax  pale."  For  seventeen  centuries  andl 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  151 

more,  shame,  and/ear  have  been  the  portion  of  the  Jews  in  their  cap- 
tivity and  tribulations  amid  the  nations,  and  this,  too,  in  fulfillment 
of  prophecy— Lev.  26  : 36-38;  Deut.  28  :  65-67;  Zeph.  3  :  19,  etc., 
etc.;  and  now,  within  the  last  one  hundred  years,  and  more  partic- 
ularly within  the  last  fifty  years,  and  more  especially  within  the  last 
thirty  years,  the  Jewish  race  has  become  eminent  in  the  nations 
where  they  dwell,  and  are  highly  favored,  and  are  made  partakers 
of  honor  and  fame  in  well  nigh  every  department  of  civilized  life. 
Immediately  after  the  time  of  Christ  they  were  brought  to  shamer 
and  their  faces  "waxed  pale,"  through  fear,  famine,  and  despair;  bub 
now  their  shame  and  fear  are  removed,  and  their  faces  no  longer 
"wax  pale;"  therefore,  these  are  the  days  for  the  accomplishment  of 
the  prophecy  under  consideration,  and  these  are  the  times  for  the 
coming  forth  of  the  "book  that  is  sealed."  The  Almighty  has  fixed 
these  periods,  and  marked  them  in  such  a  manner  that  the  sophistry 
of  "blind  guides,"  nor  the  "cunning  craftiness"  of  the  worldly  wise 
and  prudent  can  disguise  their  exact  loc^tioi  in  the  world's  history, 
their  importance  and  signification.  The  nineteenth  century  being 
thus  definitely  marked  of  God,  in  prophecy  and  history,  as  the  timer 
and  the  only  time,  in  which  Isaiah  29  :4-24  finds  its  fulfillment,  we 
enquire  for  the  "book  that  is  sealed,"  and  for  "the  words"  of  that  book 
and  can  find  nothing  that  fulfills  the  prophetic  description  but  the 
Book  of  Mormon.  It  comes  forth  in  the  exact  time  required;  it 
comes  forth  "out  of  the  ground,"  as  required;  its  "speech"  whispers 
out  of  the  dust,  as  required;  it  is  the  "speech,"  and  "vision,"  of  those 
people  who  went  out  from  Jerusalem  before  its  destruction  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, (intimated  in  the  first  four  verses),  as  required  by  the 
prophecy.  Its  language,  in  the  original,  was  "sealed,"  so  that  the 
learned  could  not  read  it,  as  required  by  the  prophecy;  its  words 
were  delivered  by  "men"  (Joseph  and  Martin)  to  the  "learned,"  just 
as  required.  Though  the  learned  could  not  read  "the  words"  when 
first  delivered,  yet  after  being  given  to  the  unlearned  they  are  read, 
just  as  required  by  the  prophecy;  it  comes  forth  a  little  while  be- 
fore Lebanon — Judea — is  "turned  into  a  fruitful  field,"  as  the 
prophecy  requires;  and  in,  and  after,  the  time  of  its  coming  forth, 
the  Jews,  for  a  wonder,  are  found  in  a  highly  favored  and  prosper- 
ous condition,  as  required  by  the  prophecy.  It  comes  richly  laden 
with  instruction  in  spiritual  things,  and  thoroughly  freighted  with 
the  essential  doctrines  of  the  Savior,  the  Lord  Christ,  as  is  intimated 
in  the  prophecy;  for,  "They  also  that  erred  in  spirit  shall  come  to 


152  The  Divine  Calling  of 

understanding,  and  they  that  murmured  shall  learn  doctrine"  (vs.  24). 
Now,  in  all  these  particulars,  as  well  as  in  others,  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon corresponds  to,  and  agrees  with  the  prophecy  under  considera- 
tion, and  no  other  book  or  work  under  heaven  does.  For  these  rea- 
sons it  is  conclusive  that  the  book  is  of  divine  origin. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  having  been  written  by  Hebrews  who  came 
out  from  Jerusalem  B.  C.  600,  we  might  reasonably  expect  them  to 
be  acquainted  with,  and  skilled  in  the  Hebrew  language,  especially 
as  they  carried  with  them  valuable  records  of  their  nation;  and  the 
book  claims  that  there  were.  Nephi,  in  first  book  of  Nephi  1  :  1, 
says: 

"I  make  a  record  in  the  language  of  ray  father,  which  consists  of  the  learning 
of  the  Jews,  and  the  language  of  the  Egyptians.11 

And  Moroni  says  : 

"And  if  our  plates  had  been  sufficiently  large  we  would  have  written  in  He- 
brew; but  the  Hebrew  hath  been  altered  by  us  also;  and  if  we  could  have  writ- 
ten in  Hebrew,  behold,  ye  would  have  had  no  imperfection  in  our  record.1'  — 
Book  of  Mormon  4:8. 


this  remarkable  and  important  claim,  that  one  portion  of  the 
ancient  inhabitants  of  America  were  skilled  in  writing  a  modified 
form  of  the  Hebrew  language,  is  fully  sustained  by  discoveries  of 
such  writing,  made  by  scientists  and  antiquarians  long  since  the 
coming  forth  of  the  Book  of  Mormon,  these  discoveries  being  in  no 
wise  connected  with  the  people  who  believe  in  the  divine  authenticity 
of  the  book.  We  first  present  an  article  from  The  Israelite  Indeed, 
a  paper  edited  by  Gr.  K.  Lederer,  a  converted  Jew.  Of  course  we 
do  not  endorse  the  groundless  and  absurb  conclusions  of  the  writer 
as  to  how  the  writer,  or  writers,  of  the  described  relic  came  to  Amer- 
ica. It  will  be  seen  that  Mr.  Lederer  perceives  that  the  Hebrew  in 
which  this  relic  is  written  is  "changed"  from  the  ancient  form  some- 
what. and  yet  it  is  not  in  "the  modern  Hebrew/'  which  would  most 
likely  be  the  case  if  a  forgery  were  possible.  It  will  be  further  seen, 
that  Mr.  Lederer  thinks  the  writer  of  the  relic  could  not  have  been 
a  Jew,  because  the  Ten  Commandments  are  there  rendered  differ- 
ently than  in  the  Bible.  The  Hebrews  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  hav- 
ing slightly  "changed"  the  language,  which  a  superstitious  Jew 
would  not  dare  to  have  done,  it  is  not  at  all  strange  that  they  should 
modify  the  form  and  letter  of  the  commandments,  though  careful 
to  retain  their  essential  import  and  meaning.  Here  is  the  article 
referred  to: 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  153 

"HEBREW  RELICS. 

[These  two  inscribed  stones  have  been  sent  to  New  York  by  their  discoverer  and  pro- 
prietor, Mr.  David  Wyrick,  of  Newark,  Ohio,  to  Mr.  Dwight,  to  be  submitted  by  him  to  the 
examination  of  the  learned,  accompanied  with  full  accounts  of  the  discovery,  and  maps  and 
drawings  illustrating  the  place  and  circumstances]. 

"We  suppose  that  many,  if  not  most  of  our  readers  have  seen,  in  religious  as 
well  as  in  secular  papers,  the  accounts  of  some  relics  which  were  found  a  few 
months  ago  in  a  mound  near  Newark,  Ohio.  These  relics  consist  of  stones,  in 
strange  shapes  bearing  Hebrew  inscriptions,  which  makes  the  case  particularly 
interesting  to  me,  as  a  Hebrew.  I  have  read,  therefore,  with  great  interest,  all 
that  has  been  published  concerning  them,  and  studied  the  opinions  of  different 
men  of  science  and  learning,  who  have  expressed  them  in  public ;  but  I  desired 
to  see  the  objects  themselves,  to  put  my  finger  on  these  relics,  which  bear  in- 
scriptions of  the  holy  language  which  once  was  written  with  the  finger  of  G-od 
upon  tables  of  stone;  a  language  spoken  and  written  by  the  prophets  of  Israel, 
who  predicted  the  main  features,  not  only  of  the  history  of  Israel  but  also  of  the 
world  at  large.  It  is  one  of  the  peculiar  and  national  characteristics  of  the 
Jews,  to  feel  a  sacred  awe  for  that  language,  and  even  for  "the  square  charac- 
ters" in  which  it  is  written,  so  that  every  written  or  printed  Hebrew  page  is 
called  "Shemos,"  by  which  the  people  mean  to  say,  a  paper  on  which  holy 
names  are  printed  or  written.  A  pious  Jew  would  never  use  any  Hebrew  book 
or  paper  for  any  secular  purpose  whatever,  and  carefully  picks  up  every  bit  and 
burns  it.  Being  now,  by  the  grace  of  God,  an  "Israelite  Indeed,"  believing  in 
Him  concerning  whom  Moses  and  the  prophets  did  write,  that  sacred  language 
has  increased  in  its  charming  influence,  upon  my  mind;  this  may  explain  my 
anxiety  to  see  those  relics  with  the  Hebrew  inscriptions,  without,  however,  en- 
tertaining the  least  hope  of  ever  having  that  wish  realized.  This  time,  however, 
I  was  gladly  disappointed;  for,  in  calling  a  few  days  ago  on  my  friend,  Mr.  The- 
odore Dwight,  ('the  Recording  Secretary  of  the  "American  Ethnological  Socie- 
ty," and  my  associate  in  the  editorship  of  this  Magazine),  my  eyes  met  with  the 
very  objects  of  my  desire.  That  I  examined  these  antiquities  carefully,  none  of 
our  readers  will,  I  think,  entertain  any  doubt.  I  recognized  all  the  letters  except 
one,  (the  ayin\  though  the  forms  of  many  of  them  are  different  from  those  now 
in  use.  This,  however,  is  not  the  case  with  the  stone  found  first,  (viz.,  in  July 
1860),  which  has  the  form  of  an  ancient  jar,  bearing  Hebrew  inscriptions  on  its 
four  sides,  which  are  in  perfectly  such  characters  as  those  generally  in  use  now. 
I  can  not  form  any  opinion  concerning  the  use  or  meaning  of  this,  which  was 
found  first,  as  the  inscriptions  do  not  lead  to  any  suggestions  whatever.  They 
are  as  follows:  1.  "Debar  Jehovah"  (meaning  the  Word  of  Jehovah).  2.  "Ko- 
desh  Kodeshim?  (The  Holy  of  Holies).  3.  ^Thcrath  Jehovah,"  (The  Law  of  Jeho- 
vah), and  4.  "Melek  Aretz,"  (King  of  the  Earth). 

"What  was  it  intended  for?  Is  it,  as  some  suppose,  a  relic  of  ancient  Free- 
masonary?  We  can  not  concur  with  that  idea,  because  the  first  question  which 
would  suggest  itself  to  our  mind  is:  How  did  this  relic  get  into  a  mound  of  the 
ancient  Indians,  and  this,  too,  at  such  a  considerable  depth,  and  altogether  sin- 
gular? We  must  leave  the  solution  of  this  problem  to  after-days,  when  men  of 
industry  and  love  for  antiquities  shall  perhaps  succeed  in  discovering  more  rel- 
ics, by  which  the  present  ones  may  find  an  explanation. 


154  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"This,  however,  is  not  the  case  with  that  before  mentioned,  which  was  found 
on  the  first  of  November,  last,  [I860].  It  is  evident — at  least  to  my  mind — 
that  the  writer,  or  carver,  intended  to  perpetuate  the  essence  of  the  Divine  law, 
which  could  not  have  been  done  in  a  better  way  than  by  engraving  it  on  a 
stone,  of  such  a  nature  as  should  be  able  to  resist  all  influences  of  the  destroy- 
ing tooth  of  time.  It  is  also  evident  to  my  mind,  that  the  writer  was  not  a  Jew 
or  an  Israelite,  as  some  suppose,  but  a  proselyte,  one  who  had  been  taught  by 
a  Hebrew,  and  perhaps  converted  to  abandon  his  idols,  to  believe  in  one  living 
and  invisible  God,  and  to  keep  his  commandments.  My  reasons  for  believing 
the  writer  not  to  have  been  a  Jew,  are  briefly  these:  1*  The  veneration  which 
the  Hebrews  of  all  classes  pay  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  particularly  to  the 
five  books  of  Moses,  is  so  great  that  the  slightest  alteration,  even  of  a  point,  is 
considered  sinful;  and  the  roll  from  which  they  read  in  the  synagogue,  in  which 
is  found  any  alteration,  transposition  of  letter,  or  incorrectness — as,  for  instance, 
a  cheth  instead  of  a  hay,  must  be  immediately  laid  by,  and  not  allowed  to  be 
used,  until  corrected.  A  Hebrew,  therefore,  who  knew  how  to  write  the  Ten 
Commandments,  would  have  either  written  them  perfectly,  or  not  at  all ;  and  as 
there  are  many  mistakes  in  that  engraving:  some  letters  entirely  wanting,  some 
transposed,  and  some  superfluous,  I  conclude  the  writer  was  not  a'  Hebrew. 
2.  The  order,  or  rather  disorder,  in  which  the  Ten  Commandments  are  engraved 
— of  which  we  have  nothing  of  a  similar  kind  elsewhere — proves  that  the  au- 
thor was  not  a  Hebrew.  3.  The  presence  of  a  human  figure,  however,  is  the 
strongest  objection  against  the  supposition  that  the  writer  was  a  Hebrew. 
Though,  in  more  recent  times,  after  the  invention  of  printing,  the  Jews  began 
to  imitate  the  Gentiles,  in  having  the  figures  of  Moses,  Aaron,  David,  and  Solo- 
mon on  the  title-pages  of  their  printed  Bibles  and  prayer-books;  yet,  in  ancient 
days — the  age  when  this  stone  must  have  been  prepared — no  Hebrew  would 
have  dared  to  carve  any  human  figure,  even  that  of  Moses,  in  connection  with 
the  Ten  Commandments.  That  this  figure  led  to  a  fatal  mistake,  is  evident  from 
the  fact,  that  the  Reverend  and  learned  John  W.  McCarty,  of  Newark,  Ohio, 
who  first  deciphered  and  read  the  inscription,  read  the  word  Moshe — Moses — 
over  the  head  of  the  figure,  in  connection  with  the  next  line  on  the  bas-relief, 
commencing:  "Who  brought  thee  out  from  the  land  of  Egypt;11  thus  making 
Moses  instead  of  Jehovah,  the  real  deliverer  of  Israel. 

"The  discovery  of  that  very  remarkable  antiquity  confirmed  rne  in  my  opinion, 
not  that  the  aborigines  of  America  are  of  Hebrew  descent,  but  that,  at  some  re- 
mote age  and  in  some  now  unknown  way,  one  or  more  pious  and  distinguished 
Hebrews  came  over  to  this  continent,  became  the  teachers  of  some  of  the  wild  tribes 
of  America,  and  thus  introduced  not  only  the  knowledge  of  the  true  and  living 
Jehovah,  but  to  some  extent  Jewish,  or  rather  Mosaic  rites  and  ceremonies  also. 
This,  I  think,  is  the  real  reason  why,  after  the  invasion  of  this  continent  by  the 
priest-ridden  and  fanatic  Spaniards  and  Portuguese,  so  many  things  resembling 
Judaism,  and  the  belief  in  one  who  came  to  enlighten  them,  departed  and  promised 
to  come  again,  was  found  among  the  southern  tribes  of  Indians,  and  all  pictures, 
engravings  and  signs  of  it  were  destroyed  by  superstitious  priests  and  monks. 

"One,  or  a  number  of  those  believing  Indians,  seeing  that,  in  the  absence  of 
their  teachers,  the  people  were  falling  gradually  back  into  their  old  pagan  habits, 
became  alarmed,  and  fearing  that,  in  a  short  time,  all  would  be  forgotten  and 
lost,  concluded  to  preserve  tJie  essence  of  faith  at  least,  by  engraving  it  on  a  talk  of 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  155 

stone.    They  did  it  with  the  best  of  their  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  writing,  as 
well  as  of  the  construction  of  the  passage. 

"The  form  of  the  characters  is  neither  the  modern  Hebrew,  (adopted  by  the 
High  council  in  consequence  of  the  fact  that  the  "Cuthiyiun,"  or  Samaritans, 
adopted  the  ancient  Hebrew),  nor  is  it  the  Samaritan,  which  shows  again  that 
the  writer  or  writers  had  already  forgotten  much.  Of  one  thing,  however,  I  am 
morally  convinced :  that  this  stone  is  a  genuine  relic  of  antiquity,  as  it  would  be  a 
greater  difficulty  to  believe  in  the  invention  of  such  a  straage  mixture  of  char- 
acters, disorder  of  combination,  and  innocent  blunders,  than  to  believe  it  the  hand- 
iwork of  a  generation  long  since  passed  away.11 — G-.  R.  LEDERER,  in  "Israelite 
Indeed,"  May,  1861. 


We  next  present  our  readers  with  an  article  on  the  same  general 
subject  from  The  Prophetic  Watchman: 

"CURIOUS  RELICS— ANCIENT  ISRAELITES  IN  AMERICA. 

"We  are  all  more  or  less  acquainted  with  the  so-called  'Indian  Mounds,'  found 
in  various  parts  of  our  country.  There  are  hundreds  of  them  in  Ohio  alone — 
several  near  Newark,  Licking  Co.  Pipes,  copper  beads  strung  upon  a  vegetable 
fibre,  human  skeletons,  skulls,  bones  of  animals  and  birds,  some  charred  by  fire, 
as  if  they  had  been  sacrificed  upon  a  burning  pile,  have  been  obtained  from 
them.  For  centuries  it  has  been  a  most  interesting  subject  of  inquiry  as  to  who 
built  these  mounds,  and  whence  came  their  builders.  "Within  the  past  few 
years  some  relics  have  been  discovered,  which  are  thought  to  throw  light  on 
the  subject: 

"The  first  is  a  little  coarse  sandstone,  not  quite  an  inch  and  a  half  high  by 
about  two  inches  long.  It  was  found  in  the  'Wilson  Mound,'  and  bears  the  face 
of  a  human  being.  On  the  forehead  are  five  distinct  Hebrew  characters,  which 
are  interpreted  to  mean :  "May  the  Lord  have  mercy  on  him  (or  me)  an  untime- 
ly birth,11  evidently  an  expression  of  humiliation. 

uThe  second  relic  from  the  same  mound  is  stone  closely  resembling  limestone- 
It  is  rather  triangular  than  square  in  its  form,  and  yet  it  differs  widely  from  both. 
It  represents  an  animal,  and  contains  four  human  faces,  and  three  inscriptions  in 
Hebrezv,  signifying  devotion,  reverence,  and  natural  depravity. 

"The  third  stone  was  found  in  1860,  about  three  miles  from  Newark.  lUias 
a  shape  like  a  wedge,  and  is  about  six  inches  long,  tapering  at  the  end.  On  one 
end  is  a  handle,  and  at  the  top  are  four  Htbrew  inscriptions. 

"The  last  relic  is  an  object  of  much  interest.  It  was  found  in  1860,  and  has 
engraved  upon  it  a  figure  of  Moses,  and  the  Ten  Commandments.  One  side  is 
depressed,  and  the  reverse  protrudes.  Over  the  figure  is  a  Hebrew  word  signi- 
fying "Moses.11  The  other  inscriptions  are  almost  literally  the  words  found  in 
some  parts  of  the  Bible,  and  the  Ten  Commandments  are  given  in  part  and  en- 
tirely— the  longest  being  abbreviated.  The  alphabet  used,  it  is  thought,  is  the 
original  Hebrew  one,  as  there  are  letters  known  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet  [not]  now 
in  use,  but  bearing  a  resemblance  to  them.  All  things  on  this  stone  point  to  the 


156  The  Divine  Calling  of 

time  before  Ezra,*  to  the  lost  tribes  of  Israel,  and  the  theory  is,  that  some  one  of 
these  tribes  found  their  way  into  this  continent,  and  settled  where  the  State  of 
Ohio  now  exists." — From  the  Prophetic  Watchman,  Sep.  14,  1866. 

Our  next  is  the  sum  of  a  lecture  delivered  in  Allegheny  City,  Pa., 
in  1866: 

"AMERICAN  ANTIQUITIES. 

UA  short  time  since  a  notice  was  published  in  the  city  papers  that  there 
would  be  an  exhibition  and  a  lecture  deliverd  by  the  Rev.  R.  M.  Miller,  in  the 
First  Presbyterian  Church,  Allegheny,  upon  some  Indian  relics  lately  discovered 
in  some  mounds  near  Newark,  Ohio,  containing  Hebrew  inscriptions,  and  as  a 
matter  of  course  I  attended  the  lecture,  as  all  Latter  Day  Saints  feel  considera- 
ble interest  in  all  the  testimony  pertaining  to  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  this  land; 
not  because  they  are  any  way  in  the  dark  upon  the  history  of  the  past  in  rela- 
tion to  them,  but  because  additional  testimony  strengthens  the  evidence  in  re- 
gard to  the  divine  authenticity  of  the  Book  of  Mormon,  in  which  they  have  per- 
fect assurance  as  being  a  sacred  record,  containing  the  covenant  for  the  gather- 
ing of  Israel,  in  conformity  with  the  testimony  of  prophets. 

"The  reverend  gentleman  commenced  his  lecture  by  giving  a  general  descrip- 
tion of  the  mounds  and  ancient  fortifications  in  Ohio  and  the  western  country. 
He  said  that  it  was  estimated  there  were  in  the  state  of  Ohio,  alone,  ten  thous- 
and of  them.  He  gave  a  very  clear  and  distinct  description  of  the  situation  and 
construction  of  several  of  them  in  the  neighborhood  of  Newark,  Ohio,  from 
whence  the  relics  he  exhibited  were  obtained.  I  believe  the  mounds  were 
from  ten  to  twelve  miles  apart,  where  they  were  found. 

"The  first  piece  he  exhibited  was  a  stone  head,  (or  rather  a  photograph  of 
it),  which  was  cut  off  of  the  neck,  close  to  the  ears.  On  the  forehead  was  writ- 
ten, in  Hebrew,  "May  the  Lord  have  mercy  upon  an  untimely  birth.1'  He  gave 
it  as  his  opinion  that  the  person  who  had  it  deposited  with  his  remains,  had 
been  executed,  perhaps  decapitated.  There  was  charcoal  and  burnt  bones  of 
animals  and  men  in  the  debris.  The  original  is  in  the  possession  of  Mr.  Tennant, 
of  Newark,  Ohio.  It  was  found  in  a  mound  three  miles  from  Newark.  In  the 
same  mound  was  found  a  three  cornered  piece,  upon  which  was  carved  two 
human  faces  and  an  animal.  On  the  forehead  of  one  of  the  figures  of  a  human 
face  was  a  phylacter,  in  the  form  of  a  skull,  upon  which  was  carved  the  letter 
used  to  denote  the  name  of  the  Almighty.  On  the  forehead  of  the  other  carved 
human  figure  was  written  in  Hebrew,  "It  is  good  to  love  the  aged."  On  the 
side  of  the  animal  was  written  in  Hebrew  something  denoting  natural  depravity. 
The  reverend  gentleman  said  it  was  the  same  as  found  in  Jeremiah:  "the  heart 
is  deceitful,"  &c.  Mr.  Strock,  of  Newark,  owns  this. 

*  It  appears  that  "the  alphabet  used,  it  is  thought,  is  the  original  Hebrew,"  and  why  do 
the  Hebrew  scholars  who  have  examined  the  inscriptions  only  think  so,  and  why  are  they 
not  certain  about  it?  Evidently  because  there  is  only  in  part  a  resemblance  between  the 
letters  in  these  inscriptions,  and  the  most  ancient  Hebrew  alphabet  of  which  Hebrew 
scholars  have  a  perfect  knowledge.  The  facts  developed  by  these  discoveries,  coincide  per- 
fectly with  a  statement  of  Mormon  in  Book  of  Mormon  chap.  4,  par.  3,  who  says:  "If  our 
plates  had  been  sufficiently  large  we  should  have  written  in  Hebrew,  but  the  Hebrew  hath 
been  altered  by  us  also."  Again,  the  Nephites  and  Zarahemlaites  came  out  from  Jerusa- 
lem just  before  the  time  of  Ezra,  therefore  the  coincidence  is  but  reasonable. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  157 

"The  third  piece  was  in  the  shape  of  a  wedge.  On  one  side  was  written,  in 
Hebrew: 

uFirst  side. — "The  Lord  is  king  of  all  the  earth" 
uSecond  side. — "The  sivord  of  the  Lord  is  the  law." 
"Third  side.— "The  Holy  of  Holies." 
"Fourth  side. — "The  Jew  of  life  is  the  Lord  awaiting  souls" 

"The  fourth  piece  was  what  he  called  a  Teraphim,  a  household  god,  and 
quoted  Judges  17  to  prove  it. 

"This  is  a  stone  about  eight  inches  long,  three  wide,  and  two  thick.  There 
is  a  depression  on  one  side  of  about  half  an  inch  deep,  and  in  the  depression 
there  is  cut  the  figure  of  a  man  dressed  in  priestly  robes,  and  over  his  head,  in 
the  depression,  is  written  the  word  "Moses"  and  in  lines  on  the  back  and  edges 
is  written  in  Hebrew  the  ten  commandments  to  Israel,  written  upon  the  tables  of 
stone  by  the  finger  of  the  Lord,  and  given  to  Moses  upon  the  mount.  There  is 
some  little  difference  between  it  and  the  version  we  have  of  it  in  the  Bible.  It 
is  a  little  more  brief.  For  instance,  it  says,  "  Who  brought  theefrom  the  land  of 
bondage"  and  "six  days  shaU  ihou  labor"  In  our  version  we  have  this  addition: 
"and  do  all  thy  work"  These  are  all  I  can  now  remember,  but  I  thought  the 
brevity  made  them  more  perfect. 

"This  Teraphim  was  found  about  two  and  a  half  miles  from  Newark,  near  the 
base  of  a  very  large  mound.  This  mound  is  composed  of  stones,  and  it  is  thought 
that  20,000  wagon  loads  have  been  carried  away,  to  build  the  canal  some  years 
since.  It  was  400  feet  at  the  base  and  50  feet  high.  Near  its  base  a  small 
mound  was  noticed,  which  was  composed  entirely  of  fire-clay,  and  some  of  the 
men  at  work  in  that  neighborhood,  thought  for  curiosity  they  would  dig  into  it, 
and  see  if  any  thing  particular  was  in  it.  The  person  dug  until  he  came  to  a 
piece  of  wood,  upon  which  he  found  some  copper  beads.  He  took  them  away 
and  of  course  exhibited  them.  This  aroused  the  curiosity  of  another  party,  and 
some  two  or  three  persons  went  and  made  further  search  into  the  fire-clay,  and 
upon  lifting  up  the  wood,  it  proved  to  be  the  lid  of  a  box,  lined  inside  with  some 
kind  of  coarse  cloth,  but  so  entirely  rotten  that  it  crumbled  at  the  touch.  The 
box  contained  a  skeleton  and  what  had  been  a  neck-lace  of  copper  beads,  but 
the  string  was  also  rotten.  The  party  removed  the  wooden  box,  and  began  to 
dig  some  deeper.  They  soon  struck  a  stone  box  of  an  oblong  shape,  cemented 
together  in  the  middle.  They  shook  and  found  it  contained  something,  as  it 
made  a  rattle  when  shaken.  They  forced  it  open,  and  found  its  contents  to  be 
the  Teraphim,  or  image,  having  these  Hebrew  inscriptions  upon  it.  If  I  remem- 
ber correctly,  this  was  found  in  the  year  1865,  the  others  some  year  or  two  be- 
fore. This  Teraphim  is  now  the  property  of  Mr.  David  Johnson,  of  Coshocton, 
Ohio.  The  Rev.  Miller  seems  to  be  a  good  Hebrew  scholar,  as  he  read  and 
criticised  the  language  in  the  presence  of  several  of  the  theological  professors  of 
the  Presbyterian  College,  Allegheny  City.  He  stated  that  he  had  taken  them 
to  Cincinnati,  and  shown  them  to  several  learned  Rabbies,  and  they  were  agreed 
that  the  Hebrew  characters  were  of  a  date  beyond  the  time  of  Ezra.  He  described, 
on  a  board,  the  difference  of  the  formation  of  the  letters  before  and  after  that 
period. 

"I  will  not  repeat  their  theories  and  conjectures  respecting  the  wanderings  of 
the  Israelites  to  reach  this  land,  but  this  he  said  was  his  conclusion : 


158  The  Divine  Calling  of 

"First. — That  some  of  the  tribes,  or  parts  of  tribes  of  Israel,  had  cnce  inhabited 
this  land. 

"Second. — That  they  were  the  mound  builders;  but  whether  the  modern  In- 
dians are  their  descendants,  or  whether  they  had  destroyed  the  Israelites,  he 
could  not  say;  but  if  the  Indians  are  not  the  descendants  .of  the  Mound  Builders, 
but  had  extirpated  them,  then  the  question  remains,  where  did  these  Indians 
come  from  ?  Who  are  they  ? 

"My  own  conclusion  respecting  these  things  is  that  of  every  Latter  Day  Saint. 
The  relics  were  hid  up,  in  the  providence  of  God,  as  collateral  testimony  of  the 
Latter  Day  "Work,  and  especially  of  the  Book  of  Mormon. 

PITTSBURO,  Pa.,  August  12, 1866.  JOSIAH  ELLS.1' 

Now,  from  these  relics  we  learn,  just  what  was  claimed  by  the 
Book  of  Mormon  over  thirty  years  before  their  discovery,  (1)  that  the 
ancient  inhabitants  of  America  possessed  a  knowledge  of,  and  wrote 
upon  enduring  substances,  a  modified  form  of  the  Hebrew  language; 
(2)  that  they  possessed  the  writings  of  Moses  and  the  prophets  up 
to  the  times  of  Jeremiah,  including  the  first  part  of  his  writings  to 
chap.  17,  verse  9, — "The  heart  is  deceitful/'  etc.  For  of  these  rec- 
ords it  is  said  by  Nephi : 

"My  father,  Lehi,  took  the  records  which  were  engraven  upon  the  plates  of 
brass,  and  he  did  search  them  from  the  beginning.  And  he  beheld  that  they 
did  contain  the  five  books  of  Moses,  which  gave  an  account  of  the  creation  of 
the  world,  and  also  of  Adam  and  Eve,  who  were  our  first  parents;  and  alao  a 
record  of  the  Jews  from  the  beginning,  even  down  to  the  commencement  of  the 
reign  of  Zedekiah,  king  of  Judah ;  and  also  the  prophecies  of  the  holy  prophets, 
from  the  beginning,  even  down  to  the  commencement  of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah ; 
and  also  many  prophecies  which  have  been  spoken  ly  tJie  mouth  of  Jeremiah.'1'1 — 1 
Nephi  1 : 46. 

We  find  (3)  that  these  sacred  writings  were  hidden  up  in  "a  stone 
box,"  as  were  the  plates  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  Here,  then,  is  a 
chain  of  evidence  in  support  of  the  claims  of  the  Book  of  Mormon, 
that  is  as  strong  as  it  is  strange,  and  one  that  cannot  fail  to  fasten  con- 
viction upon  the  mind  of  the  unprejudiced  inquirer,  while  it  joyful- 
ly confirms  the  faith  of  the  believer.  But  we  have  not  done  with 
this  language  question.  In  our  quotation  from  1  Nephi  1 : 1,  we  see 
that  the  ancient  Hebrews  on  this  continent  were  not  only  skilled  in 
writing  Hebrew,  but  also  in  "the  language  of  the  Egyptians."  It  is 
stated  in  Mosiah  1:1,  that  Lehi  had  been  "taught  in  the  language 
of  the  Egyptians/'  and  that  he  taught  the  same  to  his  children;  and 
in  Book  of  Mormon  4  : 8,  Moroni  informs  us  that  he  wrote  the  en- 
tire record  from  which  the  Book  of  Mormon  was  translated,  "in  the 
characters  which  are  called  among  us  the  reformed  Egyptian." 
Now  when  we  find  by  testimony  outside  of  the  Book  of  Mormon, 


Joseph.  Smith  Defended.  159 

that  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  America  possessed  a  knowledge  of 
Egyptian  hieroglyphics,  and  sculpturing,  and  architecture,  we  have 
another  strong  evidence  of  the  divinity  of  that  book.  This  evidence 
we  have  presented,  in  part,  on  pages  153  to  158,  and  we  now  give 
more-  Mr.  Delafield  says,  in  his  Antiquities  of  America,  page  41: 

"Still  further  and  more  important  evidence,  however,  renders  the  point  con- 
clusive that  southern  Asia  was  the  birth-place  of  this  [ancient  American]  peo- 
ple, as  we  detect  among  them  actual  traditions  of  the  flood,  the  building  of  Ba- 
bel, and  the  death  of  Abel." 

Again : 

"One  of  the  most  interesting  sources  of  comparison  between  Mexico,  Peru, 
and  Egypt,  is  to  be  found  in  an  investigation  of  their  hieroglyphic  system.  Each 
of  these  countries  had  a  peculiar  method  of  recording  events  by  means  of  hiero- 
glyphic signs,  sculpturing  them  on  monuments  and  buildings,  and  portraying 
them  on  papyrus  and  maguey." — p.  42. 

Further : 

uBaron  Humboldt  considers  the  Mexican  paintings  as  rather  corresponding 
with  the  hieratic  than  the  hieroglyphic  writings  of  the  Egyptians,  as  found  on 
the  rolls  of  papyrus  in  the  swathings  of  the  mummies,  and  which  may  be  con- 
sidered paintings  of  a  mixed  kind,  because  they  unite  symbolical  and  isolated 
characters  with  the  representation  of  an  action.  It  is  the  opinion  of  the  author 
that  further  investigations  and  discoveries  in  deciphering  Mexican  hieroglyphic 
paintings  will  exhibit  a  close  analogy  to  the  Egyptian  in  the  use  of  two  scriptural 
systems ;  the  one  for  monumental  inscription,  the  other  for  the  ordinary  purposes 
of  record  and  transmission  of  information.  "We  find  the  three  species  of  hiero- 
glyphics common  to  Mexico  and  Egy'pt" — p.  46: 

On  page  65,  Mr.  Delafield  reviews : 

"The  analogical  evidence  of  an  identity  of  the  family  of  Mexico  and  Peru  with 
that  of  Hindostan  or  Egypt,  to  simplify  which  we  name  the  several  coincidences, 
which  have  been  specified,  in  their  proper  order. 

UI.  PHILOLOGICAL.     The  various  analogies  in  language. 

"II.  ANATOMICAL.  The  peculiar  craniological  formation  common  to  those 
countries,  as  asserted  by  Dr.  Warren. 

"III.  MYTHOLOGICAL.  The  existence  of  two  peculiar  modes  of  worship, 
[that  of  Nephites  and  Lamanites?]  addressed  to  two  deities;  one  sanguinary,  the 
other  peaceful.  *  *. 

"IV.  HIEROGLYPHIC.  The  use  of  three  peculiar  systems  of  hieroglyphic  writing 
of  the  Egyptians. 

"V.  ASTRONOMICAL.  1.  Identity  in  the  division  of  the  year,  month,  and 
week;  and  the  calculations  thereof.  2.  Identity  in  the  use  of  intercalary  days. 
3.  Identity  in  zodiacal  signs. 

"VI.  ARCHITECTURAL.  1.  Identity  in  sepulchral  tumuli  [mounds  for  burial]. 
2.  Identity  in  pyramidal  temples.  3.  In  the  uses  of  these  temples.  4.  In  the 
mechanical  power  which  enabled  them  to  move  masses  that  no  other  races 
have  ever  accomplished.  5.  Their  use  of  hieroglyphic  sculpture  on  all  their 


160  The  Divine  Calling  of 

sacred  buildings.     6.  Similarity  in  zodiacal  and  planispheric carvings.     7.  Iden- 
tity in  sepulchral  ornaments. 

"VII.  Identity  in  practice  of  embalming  and  preservation  of  the  royal  corpses." 

The  ancient  Nephites,  and  Zarahemlaites,  were,  no  doubt,  not  only 
acquainted  with  the  language,  but  also  with  much  about  the  habits, 
customs,  arts,  and  sciences  peculiar  to  Egypt;  for  the  Israelites,  in 
all  their  history  from  Abraham  to  Zedekiah,  and  after,  had  direct 
and  intimate  intercourse  with  the  Egyptians.  Therefore  it  is  not 
strange  that  we  find  in  Mexico  and  Peru,  as  stated  by  Mr.  Delafield, 
these  evidences  of  Egyptian  art  and  manners,  especially  that  of 
hieroglyphic  writing.  In  conclusion  upon  this  point  we  have  only 
to  say,  that  the  claim  of  the  Book  of  Mormon — that  the  ancient  in- 
habitants of  America  were  skilled  in  the  Egyptian  language,  is  now 
fully  vindicated.  And  here  we  have  another  unanswerable  proof  of 
the  truth  of  the  book. 

Further  proof  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  seen  in  its  statements 
that  highly  civilized  and  cultivated  peoples  located  anciently  in  the 
northern  part  of  South  America,  Central  America,  and  in  the  south- 
ern part  of  North  America,  where  they  builded  very  large  and  splen- 
did cities,  especially  in  Central  America,  and  near  "the  narrow  neck 
of  land/'  (Isthmus  of  Panama),  making  these  statements  when  little 
or  nothing  was  known  to  the  generality  of  mankind,  in  respect  to 
the  last  named  region.  Since  the  coming  forth  of  the  book,  the  dis- 
coveries of  Stephens  and  Catherwood,  and  others,  have  disclosed 
the  fact  that  in  the  very  region  where  the  Book  of  Mormon  locates 
them  there  were  many  magnificent  cities  built  up  by  the  ancients. 
Up  to  the  time  of  the  discoveries  by  Stephens  and  Catherwood,  in 
1839-1843,  that  region  known  as  Central  America  was  not  sup- 
posed to  contain  any  interesting  antiquities,  though  considerable 
had  been  learned  in  regard  to  the  antiquities  of  Peru,  and  of 
Mexico.  It  remained  for  these  gentlemen  to  bring  to  light  rich 
treasures  of  information  in  respect  to  the  ancient  civilizations  of  this 
region,  and  to  disclose  to  the  world  the  fact  that  here  had  been  the 
theatre  of  the  grandest  industries,  and  the  site  of  the  most  cultivated, 
opulent,  and  enlightened  nations  of  all  antiquity.  For  ten  or  twelve 
years  the  Book  of  Mormon  had  been  quietly  proclaiming  these  facts, 
when  its  statements  were  fully  confirmed  by  these  timely  discoveries. 
i  ^Who  is  there  so  blind  as  not  to  see  the  overruling  hand  of  God 
in  these  things!  Such  coincidences  are  not  the  result  of  chance. 
They  exhibit  too  clearly  the  work^of  an  All-Wise  mind,  to  be  so 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  161 

considered.     Mr.  Stephens,  in  his  '"Central  America,  Chiapas,  and 
Yucatan"  vol.  1,  p.  98,  says: 

"Of  the  great  cities  beyond  the  vale  of  Mexico,  buried  in  forests,  ruined,  deso- 
late, and  without  a  name,  Humboldt  never  heard,  or,  at  least,  he  never  visited 
them.  It  is  but  lately  [Mr.  Stephens  writes  in  1841J  that  accounts  of  their  ex- 
istence reached  Europe  and  our  own  country.  These  accounts,  however  vague 
and  unsatisfactory,  had  roused  our  curiosity;  though  I  ought  perhaps  to  say  that 
both  Mr.  C.  and  I  were  somewhat  skeptical,  and  when  we  arrived  at  Copan,  it 
was  with  the  hope,  rather  than  the  expectation,  of  finding  wonders.1' 

But  it  was  not  long  before  their  labors  were  rewarded  in  discover- 
ing the  ruins  of  many  ancient  cities,  which  have  been  visited  since 
by  other  antiquarians. 

Another  evidence  in  favor  of  the  Book  of  Mormon  is  seen  in  the 
fact  that  it  teaches,  in  Alma  16  : 26,  and  in  Ether  1:11,  and  else- 
where, that  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  America  knew  concerning  the 
crucifixion  of  Christ,  both  by  revelation  and  by  history,  and  were 
therefore  acquainted  with  the  cross  as  a  religious  symbol;  and  in  the 
further  fact  that  the  antiquities  of  America  disclose  that  the  cross 
was  so  used  by  the  ancients.  Baldwin,  in  "Ancient  America  "  men- 
tions this  fact  on  pages  109,  110,  and  293.  Stephens  does  also,  in 
his  "Central  America"  vol.  2,  p.  347,  and  elsewhere.  The  testimo- 
ny of  the  Book  of  Mormon,  and  of  the  antiquities  of  America,  are 
one  upon  this  point;  the  latter  and  the  latest  confirming  the  former. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  states  that  many  of  the  ancient  inhabitants- 
of  America  became  idolators  (book  of  Mormon  2  :  3),  arid  the  dis- 
coveries of  American  antiquarians  fully  confirm  this. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  states  that  America  abounds  with  gold,  sil- 
ver, and  many  othor  precious  metals;  and  discoveries  since  1849 
give  special  confirmation  to  this  claim.  And  here  we  may  remark 
that  America,  the  Book  of  Mormon  claims,  is  the  special  heritage 
of  Joseph  and  his  posterity,  as  provided  for  in  the  prophetic  blessing 
of  Jacob  (Gen.  49  : 22-26,  with  Gen.  48  : 16-19),  and  the  prophetic 
blessing  of  Moses  also  (Deut.  33 : 13-17).  Moses  says  of  Joseph : 

"Blessed  of  the  Lord  be  his  land,  for  the  precious  things  of  heaven  [the  re- 
vealed will  of  God],  and  for  the  dew  [its  universal  distribution],  and  for  the 
deep  that  coucheth  beneath  [springs,  rivers,  lakes,  seas,  and  their  products], 
and  for  the  precious  fruits  brought  forth  by  the  sun  [by  the  action  of  its  light 
in  the  vegetable  kingdom],  and  for  the  precious  things  put  forth  by  the  moon 
[in  the  action  of  its  light  on  the  vegetable  kingdom  and  in  respect  to  the  tides], 
and  for  the  chief  things  of  the  ancient  mountains,  and  for  the  precious  things  of 
the  lasting  hills  [their  various  metals,  minerals,  etc.],  and  for  the  precious  things 
of  the  earth  and  fulness  thereof  [embracing  the  animal,  vegetable,  and  mineral 


162  The  Divine  Calling  of 

kingdoms  of  earth,  in  their  'fulness'],  and  for  the  good  will  of  him  that  dwelt 
in  the  bush  [the  Lord— see  Acts  7:30-34]." 

Joseph's  portion  in  Palestine  could  never  fill  this  description,  but 
the  land  of  America,  and  that  alone,  does.  The  "precious  things  of 
the  ancient  mountains"  used  in  building  and  beautifying  the  temple 
of  Solomon  did  not  come  from  Joseph's  portion  in  Judea,  yet  they 
undoubtedly  would  had  they  been  there.  Joseph's  portion  in  Pal- 
estine was  not  the  "land"  alluded  to  for  another  reason,  it  did  not  lie 
in  the  right  place;  for  Jacob  said  it  should  be  "unto  the  utmost  [the 
outermost,  the  farthest,  the  extreme]  bound  of  the  everlasting  hills" 
(Gen.  49  : 26).  To  go  from  Goshen,  in  Egypt,  where  Jacob  was 
when  uttering  this  prophecy,  to  "the  utmost  bound  of  the  everlast- 
ing hills/'  would  bring  us  to  the  mountain  ranges  of  America,  to 
the  land  claimed  for  Joseph  by  the  Book  of  Mormon.  And  that 
America  is  the  special  portion  of  Joseph  may  be  gathered  from  the 
prophetic  blessing  put  by  Jacob  upon  the  seed  of  Joseph,  as  follows: 

"And  he  blessed  Joseph,  and  said,  God,  before  whom  my  fathers,  Abraham  and 
Isaac  did  walk,  the  God  which  fed  me  all  my  life  long  unto  this  day,  the  Angel 
which  redeemed  me  from  all  evil,  bless  the  lads;  and  let  my  name  be  named 
on  them,  and  the  name  of  my  fathers  Abraham  and  Isaac;  and  let  them  [Eph- 
raim  and  Manasseh]  grow  into  a  multitude  in  the  midst  of  the  earth" 

"The  midst  of  the  earth"  geographically  considered,  measuring 
from  where  Jacob  pronounced  the  blessing,  would  be  the  land  of 
America,  precisely.  Nor  is  this  all;  Jacob  predicts  in  verse  19, 
that  Ephraim's  "seed  shall  become  a  multitude  of  nations."  In 
America  we  find  "a  multitude  of  nations"*  of  one  common  stock, 
whose  traditions,  religious  rites  and  customs,  language  and  language 
relics,  clearly  demonstrate  their  Israelitish  origin ;  and  we  find  them 
in  the  very  place  marked  in  prophecy,  as  the  land  of  Joseph  and  his 
seed.  Here  is  another  strong  proof  of  the  truth  of  the  Book  of 
Mormon.  Its  claims  in  this  respect  are  well  sustained  by  the  facts 
of  both  prophecy  and  history. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  states  that  at  the  crucifixion  of  Christ  the 
face  of  the  land  in  Central  America,  and  around  it,  was  broken  up 

*  The  Book  of  Mormon  states  that  Lehi  was  of  Manasseh,  and  some  argue  thence  that 
•"the  multitude  of  nations"  found  in  America  cannot  be  in  any  sense  of  Ephraim.  We 
-would  remind  such  reasoners  that  the  seed  of  Ishmael  and  his  sons,  and  of  Zoram,  who  ac- 
companied Lehi,  and  the  seed  of  those  who  accompanied  Mulek,  who  finally  became  blend- 
ed with  the  Nephites  and  Lamanites,  may  all  have  been  of  the  lineage  of  Ephraim.  This 
is  neither  impossible  nor  improbable.  This,  if  true,  would  give  large  preponderance  to 
Ephraim.  Besides  this  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  together,  were  sometimes  called  Ephra- 
im.—Hosea  5 : 3, 13 ;  6:4,10;  Isaiah  7:  8,  etc.,  etc.  And  this  is  not  strange  when  wo  re- 
member that  Jacob  "set  Ephraim  before  Manasseh." — Gen.  48 :  20. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  163 

by  earthquakes,  and  that  many  cities  were  sunk. — Book  of  Nephi 
4  : 2-6.  Evidences  of  such  a  catastrophe  have  been  of  late  discov- 
ered. Baldwin,  in  "Ancient  America"  pages  274  and  275,  says 
that  James  S.  Wilson,  Esq.,  in  1860,  "discovered  on  the  coast  of 
Ecuador,  ancient  or  fossil  pottery  vessels,  images,  and;  other  manu- 
factured articles,  all  finely  wrought.  Some  of  these  articles  were 
made  of  gold.  The  most  remarkable  fact  connected  with  them  is 
that  they  were  taken  from  <a  stratum  of  ancient  surface-earth'  which 
was  covered  with  a  marine  deposit  six  feet  thick.  *  *  *  The  ancient 
surface-earth  or  vegetable  mould,  with  its  pottery,  gold-work,  and 
other  relics  of  civilized  human  life,  was,  therefore,  /below  the  sea  when 
that  marine  deposit  was  spread  over  it.  This  land,  after  being  occu- 
pied by  men,  had  subsided  and  settled  below  the  ocean,  remained  there 
long  enough  to  accumulate  the  marine  deposit,  and  again  be  elevated 
to  its  former  position  above  the  level  of  the  sea."  Of  these  discov- 
eries, Sir  Eoderick  Murchison,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Royal^Geological 
Society,  in  1862,  says: 

"The  discoveries  which  Mr.  Wilson  has  made  of  the  existence  of  the  works 
of  man  in  a  stratum  of  mould  beneath  the  sea  level,  and  covered  by  several  feet 
of  clay,  the  phenomenon  being  persistent  for  sixty  miles,  are  of  the  highest  in- 
terest to  physical  geographers  and  geologists.  The  facts  seem  to  demonstrate 
that,  wtthin  the  human  period,  the  lands  of  the  west  coast  of  Equatorial  America 
were  depressed  and  submerged^  and  that,  after  the  accumulation  of  marine  clays, 
above  the  terrestial  relics  the  whole  coast  was  elevated  to  its  present  position." 

Now  we  submit,  that,  when  these  lands  were  "depressed  and  sub- 
merged" it  was  done,  not  gradually,  but  suddenly,  as  the  presence 
of  these  valuable  relics  attests.  Had  they  been  depressed  gradually, 
through  a  lapse  of  years,  or  months,  or  even  weeks,  these  valuables 
would  have  been  removed  to  places  of  safety.  But  the  presence, 
under  this  marine  deposit,  of  "fossil  pottery,  vessels,  images,"  "all 
finely  wrought''  and  "some  of  the  articles  made  of  gold,"  demon- 
strates that  the  catastrophe  by  which  they  were  sunken  and  over- 
whelmed, was  as  sudden  as  that  which  buried  Herculaneum  and 
Pompeii. 

The  Book  of  Mormon,  we  see,  tells  us  of  the  sudden  depression  and 
submergence  of  lands,  towns,  and  cities,  in  these  very  regions,  and 
travelers  and  antiquarians,  after  the  coming  forth  of  that  book,  and 
near  2000  years  after  the  marvellous  event  occurred,  find  abundant 
evidence  to  confirm  the  statement.  Hence,  in  this,  we  find  another 
remarkable  proof  of  the  Book  of  Mormon. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  states  that  there  were  horses  on  this  conti* 


164  The  Divine  Calling  of 

nent  more  than  3.800  years  ago. — Ether  4 : 3.  Now  it  was  com- 
monly thought  at  the  time  when  the  Book  of  Mormon  was  first  given 
to  the  world,  that  there  were  no  horses  in  America  till  they  were 
brought  by  the  Spaniards  in  the  sixteenth  century.  But  recent  dis- 
coveries of  the  fossil  remains  of  the  horse,  in  many  places  in  Amer- 
ica, go  to  confirm  the  statements  of  the  Book  of  Mormon.  Prof. 
Winchell,  in  his  "Sketches  of  Creation"  page  210,  says: 

"It  is  a  curious  fact  that  so  many  generi,  now  extinct  from  the  Continent,  but 
living  in  other  quarters  of  the  globe,  were  once  abundant  on  the  plains  of  North 
America.  Various  species  of  the  horse  have  dwelt  here  for  ages,  and  the  ques- 
tion reasonably  arises  whether  the  wild  horses  of  the  Pampas  may  not  have 
been  indigenous.  Here,  too,  the  camel  found  a  suitable  home." 

Recently  discoveries  have  been  made  of  the  fossil  remains  of  the 
horse  and  some  of  the  other  animals  mentioned  in  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon. A  correspondent  of  the  Eugene  City  (Oregon)  Guard  gives 
the  following  account  of  a  visit  made  June,  1877,  by  himself  and  an- 
other person  to  the  so-called  fossil  beds  of  Lake  county,  that  State : 

*  *  *  "We  found  fossil  bones  of  the  elephant,  camel,  horse,  and  elk,  or  rein- 
deer, the  horse  being  much  more  abundant  than  either  of  the  others,  but  all 
being  so  clearly  marked  as  to  leave  no  doubt  of  their  identity.  There  were 
other  bones,  apparently  of  largo  animals,  but  your  correspondent  was  unable  to 
name  the  animal  they  once  belonged  to.  Among  the  fossils  found,  the  smaller 
quadrupeds  had  a  representation;  bones  answering  to  the  fox  and  wolf  were 
found;  also  others  answering  to  the  sheep  or  goat  in  size  and  appearance.1' 

This  affords  good  proof,  from  the  fact  that  the  book  stated  that 
which  was  contrary  to  the  common  belief,  and  subsequent  discoveries 
confirm  that  apparent!?/  false  statement. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  predicts  the  rapid  downfall  of  "the  great 
and  abominable  church"  after  the  coming  forth  of  that  book : 

"And  it  came  to  pass  that  I  beheld  that  the  wrath  of  God  was  poured  out  upon 
the  great  and  abominable  church,  insomuch  that  there  were  wars  and  rumors  of 
wars  among  all  the  nations  and  kindreds  of  the  earth,  and  as  there  began  to  be 
wars  and  rumors  of  wars  among  all  the  nations  which  belonged  to  the  mother 
of  abominations,  the  angel  spake  unto  me,  saying,  Behold,  the  wrath  of  God  is 
upon  the  mother  of  harlots;  and  behold,  thou  seest  all  these  things;  and  when 
the  day  cometh  that  the  wrath  of  God  is  poured  out  upon  the  mother  of  harlots, 
which  is  the  great  abominable  church  of  all  the  earth,  whose  foundation  is  the 
devil,  then,  at  that  day,  the  work  of  the  Father  shall  commence,  in  preparing  the 
way  for  the  fulfilling  of  his  covenants,  which  he  hath  made  to  his  people,  who 
are  of  the  house  of  Israel." — 1  Nephi  3:51. 

"And  after  our  seed  is  scattered,  the  Lord  God  will  proceed  to  do  a  marvel- 
ous work  among  the  Gentiles,  which  shall  be  of  great  worth  unto  our  seed; 
wherefore,  it  is  likened  unto  their  being  nourished  by  the  Gentiles,  and  being 
carried  in  their  arms  and  upon  their  shoulders.  And  it  shall  also  be  of  worth 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  165 

unto  the  Gentiles :  and  not  only  unto  the  G-entiles,  but  unto  all  the  house  of 
Israel,  unto  the  making  known  of  the  covenants  of  the  Father  of  heaven  unto 
Abraham,  saying,  In  thy  seed  shall  all  the  kindreds  of  the  earth  be  blessed. 
And  I  would,  my  brethren,  that  ye  should  know  that  all  the  kindreds  of  the 
earth  cannot  be  blessed,  unless  he  shall  make  bare  his  arm  in  the  eyes  of  the 
nations.  "Wherefore,  the  Lord  God  will  proceed  to  make  bare  his  arm  in  the 
eyes  of  all  the  nations,  in  bringing  about  his  covenants  and  his  gospel,  unto  those 
who  are  of  the  house  of  Israel.  Wherefore,  he  will  bring  them  again  out  of 
captivity,  and  they  shall  be  gathered  together  to  the  lands  of  their  inheritance: 
and  they  shall  be  brought  out  of  obscurity,  and  out  of  darkness :  and  they  shall 
know  that  the  Lord  is  their  Savior  and  their  Redeemer,  the  mighty  one  of  Israel. 
And  the  blood  of  that  great  and  abominable  church,  which  is  the  whore  of  all 
the  earth,  shall  turn  upon  their  own  heads ;  for  they  shall  war  among  themselves, 
and  the  sword  of  their  own  hands  shall  fall  upon  their  own  heads,  and  they 
shall  be  drunken  with  their  own  blood.  And  every  nation  which  shall  war 
against  thee,  0  house  of  Israel,  shall  be  turned  one  against  another,  and  they 
shall  fall  into  the  pit  which  they  digged  to  ensnare  the  people  of  the  Lord.1' — 
1  Nephi  7:2. 

That  this  is  particularly  true  of  the  Papacy,  one  division  of  the 
great  and  abominable  church)  all  may  know  who  seek  to  inform 
themselves.  The  shock  if.  received  by  the  "Young  Italy"  party  un- 
der Mazzini  and  others  in  1831,  and  forward;  the  staggering  blows 
it  sustained  in  1848-9,  at  the  hands  of  the  Provisional  Government 
and  the  Roman  National  Assembly;  the  wounds  it  received  in  1864 
by  means  of  the  Pope's  Ecyclical  letter ;  and  the  rapid  decline  of 
that  form  of  religion  in  all  its  former  strong-holds  since  the  king  of 
Italy,  in  August,  1870,  wrenched  from  the  hand  of  the  Pope  the 
sceptre  of  civil  power,  has  left  that  church  broken,  divided,  and  tot- 
tering to  its  final  fall.  And  there  is  not,  probably,  one  Catholic  na- 
tion that  has  not  been  engaged  in  war  since  1830.  In  these  things 
the  predictions  of  the  book  prove  true. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  predicts,  1  Nephi  7  :  2;  2  Nephi  5:5;  11 : 
3;  12:13;  Nephi  2: 12;  10:1;  Mormon  1:9;  2  :  6,  etc.,  etc.,  that 
soon  after  the  coming  forth  of  that  book  the  Lord  will  begin  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  the  speedy  restoration  and  gathering  of  Israel — in- 
cluding the  Jews.  The  interest  taken  by  England,  France,  and 
America  in  the  civilization  and  enlightenment  of  the  aborigines  of 
America  and  of  the  adjacent  islands,  the  restored  state  of  the  land 
of  Judea,  and  the  highly  improved  and  favored  condition  of  the 
Jews,  go  very  far  to  confirm  the  truth  of  these  remarkable  predic- 
tions. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  predicts  that  soon  after  its  coming  forth 
"the  Lord  God  shall  cause  a  great  division  among  the  people;  and 


166  The  Divine  Calling  of 

the  wicked  will  he  destroy;  and  he  will  spare  his  people,  yea,  even 
if  it  so  be  that  he  must  destroy  the  wicked  by  fire." — 2  Nephi  12 : 
14.  And  now  we  see  division  everywhere,  in  all  departments  of  so- 
ciety, especially  in  matters  of  religion}  politics,  and  civil  government, 
and  between  labor  and  capital. 

The  Book  of  Mormon  predicts  with  clearness  the  corrupt  state  of 
the  world  as  it  is  to-day,  and  the  means  by  which  it  is  caused : 

"And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  those  who  have  dwindled  in  unbelief,  shall 
be  smitten  by  the  land  of  the  Gentiles.  And  the  Gentiles  are  lifted  up  in  the 
pride  of  their  eyes,  and  have  stumbled,  because  of  the  greatness  of  their  stum- 
bling block,  that  they  have  built  up  many  churches;  nevertheless  they  put 
down  the  power  and  the  miracles  of  God,  and  preach  up  unto  themselves  their 
own  wisdom,  and  their  own  learning,  that  they  may  get  gain,  and  grind  upon 
the  face  of  the  poor ;  and  there  are  many  churches  built  up  which  cause  envy- 
ings,  and  strifes,  and  malice ;  and  there  are  also  secret  combinations,  even  as  in 
times  of  old,  according  to  the  combinations  of  the  devil,  for  he  is  the  foundation 
of  all  these  things;  yea,  the  foundation  of  murder,  and  works  of  darkness;  yea, 
and  he  leadeth  them  by  the  neck  with  a  flaxen  cord,  until  he  bindeth  them  with 
his  strong  cords  forever.  For  behold,  my  beloved  brethren,  I  say  unto  you, 
that  the  Lord  God  worketh  not  in  darkness.  He  doeth  not  any  thing  save  it  be 
for  the  benefit  of  the  world;  for  he  loveth  the  world,  even  that  he  layeth  down 
his  own  life  that  he  may  draw  all  men  unto  him.  Wherefore,  he  commandeth 
none  that  they  shall  not  partake  of  his  salvation.  Behold,  doth  he  cry  unto  any, 
saying,  Depart  from  me?  Behold,  I  say  unto  you,  Nay;  but  he  saith,  Come 
unto  me  all  ye  ends  of  the  earth,  buy  milk  and  honey,  without  money  and  with- 
out price.  Behold,  hath  he  commanded  any  that  they  should  depart  out  of  the 
synagogues,  or  out  of  the  houses  of  worship?  Behold,  I  say  unto  you,  Nay. 
Hath  he  commanded  any  that  they  should  not  partake  of  his  salvation  ?  Be- 
held,  I  say  unto  you,  Nay;  but  he  hath  given  it  free  for  all  men;  and  he  hath 
commanded  his  people  that  they  should  persuade  all  men  to  repentance.  Be- 
hold hath  the  Lord  commanded  any  that  they  should  not  partake  of  his  good- 
ness? Behold  I  say  unto  you  nay;  but  all  men  are  privileged  the  one  like  unto 
the  other,  and  none  are  forbidden.  He  commandeth  that  there  shall  be  no 
priestcrafts;  for,  behold,  priestcrafts  are  that  men  preach  and  set  themselves  up 
for  a  light  unto  the  world,  that  they  may  get  gain,  and  praise  of  the  world;  but 
they  seek  not  the  welfare  of  Zion.  Behold,  the  Lord  hath  forbidden  this  thing; 
wherefore,  the  Lord  God  hath  given  a  commandment,  that  all  men  should  have 
charity,  which  charity  is  love.  And  except  they  should  have  charity,  they 
were  nothing :  wherefore,  if  they  should  have  charity,  they  would  not  suffer  the 
laborer  in  Zion  to  perish.  But  the  laborer  in  Zion,  shall  labor  for  Zion;  for  if 
they  labor  for  money,  they  shall  perish.  And,  again,  the  Lord  God  hath  com- 
manded that  men  should  not  murder;  that  they  should  not  lie;  that  they  should 
not  steal;  that  they  should  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  their  God  in  vain; 
that  they  should  not  envy ;  that  they  should  not  have  malice ;  that  they  should 
not  contend  one  with  another;  that  they  should  not  commit  whoredoms;  and 
that  they  should  do  none  of  these  things  ;*  for  whoso  doeth  them  shall  perish ;  for 
none  of  these  iniquities  come  of  the  Lord ;  for  he  doeth  that  which  is  good 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  167 

among  the  children  of  men ;  and  he  doeth  nothing  save  it  be  plain  unto  the 
children  of  men;  and  he  inviteth  them  all  to  come  unto  him,  and  partake  of  his 
goodness;  and  he  denieth  none  that  come  unto  him,  black  and  white,  bond  and 
free,  male  and  female;  and  he  remembereth  the  heathen,  and  all  are  alike  unto 
God,  both  Jew  and  Gentile.  But  behold,  in  the  last  days,  or  in  the  days  of  the 
Gentiles;  yea,  behold  all  the  nations  of  the  Gentiles,  and  also  the  Jews,  both 
those  who  shall  come  upon  this  land,  and  those  who  shall  be  upon  other  lands; 
yea,  even  upon  all  the  lands  of  the  earth ;  behold  they  will  be  drunken  with  in- 
iquity, and  all  manner  of  abominations;  and  when  that  day  shall  come,  they 
shall  be  visited  of  the  Lord  of  hosts,  with  thunder  and  with  earthquake,  and 
with  a  great  noise,  and  with  storm  and  with  tempest,  and  with  the  flame  of  de- 
vouring fire;  and  all  the  nations  that  fight  against  Zion.  and  that  distress  herr 
shall  be  as  a  dream  of  a  night  vision ;  yea,  it  shall  be  unto  them  even  as  unto  a 
hungry  man,  which  dreameth,  and  behold  he  eateth,  but  he  awaketh  and  hi» 
soul  is  empty;  or  like  unto  a  thirsty  man  which  dreameth,  and  behold  he  drink- 
eth,  but  he  awaketh,  and  behold  he  is  faint,  and  his  soul  hateth  appetite:  year 
even  so  shall  the  multitude  of  all  the  nations  be  that  fight  against  mount  Zionr 
for  behold,  all  ye  that  do  iniquity,  stay  yourselves  and  wonder;  for  ye  shall  cry 
out,  and  cry;  yea,  ye  shall  be  drunken,  but  not  with  wine;  ye  shall  stagger,  but 
not  with  strong  drink;  for  behold,  the  Lord  hath  poured  out  upon  you,  the  spirit 
of  deep  sleep.  For  behold,  ye  have  closed  your  eyes,  and  ye  have  rejected  the 
prophets,  and  your  rulers,  and  the  seers  hath  he  covered  because  of  your 
iniquity."— 2  Nephi  11:14,  15,  16. 

uAnd  now,  behold,  my  brethren,  I  have  spoken  unto  you  according  as  the 
spirit  hath  constrained  me;  wherefore,  I  know  that  they  must  surely  come  to- 
pass.  And  the  things  which  shall  be  written  out  of  the  book  shall  be  of  great 
worth  unto  the  children  of  men,  and  especially  unto  our  seed,  which  is  a  rem- 
nant of  the  house  of  Israel.  For  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day,  that  the- 
churches  which  are  built  up,  and  not  unto  the  Lord,  when  the  one  shall  say 
unto  the  other,  Behold,  I,  I  am  the  Lord's ;  and  the  other  shall  say,  I,  I  am  the- 
Lord's.  And  thus  shall  every  one  say,  that  hath  built  up  churches,  and  not 
unto  the  Lord;  and  they  shall  contend  one  with  another;  and  their  priests  shalJ 
contend  one  with  another;  and  they  shall  teach  with  their  learning,  and  deny 
the  Holy  Ghost,  which  giveth  utterance.  And  they  deny  the  power  of  God, 
the  Holy  One  of  Israel;  and  they  say  unto  the  people,  Hearken  unto  us,  and  hear 
ye  our  precept;  for  behold,  there  is  no  God  to-day,  for  the  Lord  and  Redeemer 
hath  done  his  work,  and  he  hath  given  his  power  unto  men.  Behold,  hearken 
ye  unto  my  precept :  if  they  shall  say  there  is  a  miracle  wrought  by  the  hand 
of  the  Lord,  believe  it  not;  for  this  day  he  is  not  a  God  of  miracles;  he  hath 
done  his  work.  Yea,  and  there  shall  be  many  which  shall  say,  Eat,  drink,  and 
be  merry,  for  to-morrow  we  die,  and  it  shall  be  well  with  us.  And  there  shall 
also  be  many  which  shall  say,  Eat,  drink,  and  be  merry;  nevertheless,  fear  God, 
lie  will  justify  in  committing  a  little  sin:  yea,  lie  a  little,  take  the  advantage  of 
one  because  of  his  words,  dig  a  pit  for  thy  neighbor;  there  is  no  harm  in  this. 
And  do  all  these  things,  for  to-morrow  we  die;  and  if  it  s:>  be  that  we  are  guilty, 
God  will  beat  us  with  a  few  stripes,  and  at  last  we  shall  be  saved  in  the  kingdom 
of  God.  Yea,  and  there  shall  be  many  which  shall  teach  after  this  manner, 
false,  and  vain,  and  foolish  doctrines,  and  shall  be  puffed  up  in  their  hearts, 
and  shall  seek  deep  to  hide  their  counsels  from  the  Lord;  and  their  works  shall 


168  The  Divine  Calling  of 

be  in  the  dark;  and  the  blood  of  the  saints  shall  cry  from  the  ground  against 
them.  Yea,  they  have  all  gone  out  of  the  way;  they  have  become  corrupted. 
Because  of  pride,  and  because  of  false  teachers,  and  false  doctrine,  their  church- 
es have  become  corrupted;  and  their  churches  are  lifted  up;  because  of  pride 
they  are  puffed  up.  They  rob  the  poor,  because  of  their  fine  sanctuaries;  they 
rob  the  poor  because  of  their  fine  clothing;  and  they  persecute  the  meek,  and 
the  poor  iu  heart;  because  in  their  pride,  they  are  puffed  up.  They  wear  stiff 
necks  and  high  heads;  yea,  and  because  of  pride,  and  wickedness,  and  abom- 
inations, and  whoredoms,  they  have  all  gone  astray,  save  it  be  a  few,  who  are 
the  humble  followers  of  Christ;  nevertheless,  they  are  led,  that  in  many  instan- 
ces they  do  err,  because  they  are  taught  by  the  precepts  of  men. 

"0  the  wise,  and  the  learned,  and  the  rich,  that  are  puffed  up  in  the  pride  of 
their  hearts,  and  all  those  who  preach  false  doctrine,  and  all  those  who  commit 
whoredoms,  and  pervert  the  right  way  of  the  Lord;  wo,  wo,  wo  be  unto  them, 
saith  the  Lord  God  Almighty,  for  they  shall  be  thrust  down  to  hell. 

"Wo  unto  them  that  turn  aside  the  just  for  a  thing  of  nought,  and  revile 
against  that  which  is  good,  and  say  that  it  is  of  no  worth :  for  the  day  shall  come 
that  the  Lord  God  will  speedily  visit  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth ;  and  in  that 
day  that  they  are  fully  ripe  in  iniquity,  they  shall  perish.  But  behold,  if  the  in- 
habitants of  the  earth  shall  repent  of  their  wickedness  and  abominations,  they 
shall  not  be  destroyed,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts.  But  behold,  that  great  and  abom- 
inable church,  the  whore  of  all  the  earth,  must  tumble  to  the  earth;  and  great 
must  be  the  fall  thereof:  for  the  kingdom  of  the  devil  must  shake,  and  they 
which  belong  to  it  must  needs  be  stirred  up  unto  repentance,  or  the  devil  will 
grasp  them  with  his  everlasting  chains,  and  they  be  stirred  up  to  anger  and  per- 
ish: for  behold,  at  that  day  shall  he  rage  in  the  hearts  of  the  children  of  men, 
and  stirthem  up  to  anger  against  that  which  is  good;  and  others  will  he  pacify, 
and  lull  them  away  into  carnal  security,  that  they  will  say,  All  is  well  in  Zion ; 
yea,  Zion  prospereth,  all  is  well;  and  thus  the  devil  cheateth  their  souls,  and 
leadeth  them  away  carefully  down  to  hell.  And  behold,  others  he  flattereth 
away,  and  telleth  them  there  is  no  hell;  and  he  saith  unto  them,  I  am  no  devil,  for 
there  is  none :  and  thus  he  whispereth  in  their  ears,  until  he  grasps  them  with 
his  awful  chains,  from  whence  there  is  no  deliverance.  Yea,  they  are  grasped 
with  death  and  hell;  and  death,  and  hell,  and  the  devil,  and  all  that  have  been 
seized  therewith,  must  stand  before  the  throne  of  God  and  be  judged  according  to 
their  works,  from  whence  they  must  go  into  the  place  prepared  for  them,  even  a 
lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  which  is  endless  torment.  Therefore,  wo  be  unto 
.  him  that  is  at  ease  in  Zion.  Wo  be  unto  him  that  crieth,  All  is  well ;  yea,  wo  be 
unto  him  that  hearkeneth  unto  the  precepts  of  men,  and  denieth  the  power  of 
God  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Yea,  wo  be  unto  him  that  saith,  We  have 
received,  and  we  need  no  more.  And  in  fine,  wo  unto  all  those  who  tremble, 
and  are  angry  because  of  the  truth  of  God.  For  behold,  he  that  is  built  upon 
the  rock,  receiveth  it  with  gladness:  and  he  that  is  built  upon  a  sandy  founda- 
tion, trembleth,  lest  he  shall  fall. 

"Wo  be  unto  him  that  shall  say,  Yvre  have  received  the  word  of  God,  and  we 
need  no  more  of  the  word  of  God,  for  we  have  enough.  For  behold,  thus  saith 
the  Lord  God:  I  will  give  unto  the  children  of  men  line  upon  line,  precept  upon 
precept,  here  a  little  and  there  a  little:  and  blessed  are  those  who  hearken  un- 
to my  precepts,  and  lend  an  ear  unto  my  counsel,  for  they  shall  learn  wisdom ; 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  169 

for  unto  him  that  receiveth,  I  will  give  more :  and  from  them  that  shall  say,  We 
have  enough,  from  them  shall  be  taken  away  even  that  which  they  have. 
Cursed  is  he  that  putteth  his  trust  in  man,  or  maketh  flesh  his  arm,  or  shall 
hearken  unto  the  precepts  of  men,  save  their  precepts  shall  be  given  by  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"Wo  be  unto  the  Gentiles,  saith  the  Lord  God  of  hosts;  for  notwithstanding 
I  shall  lengthen  out  mine  arm  unto  them  from  day  to  day,  they  will  deny  me; 
nevertheless,  I  will  be  merciful  unto  them,  saith  the  Lord  God,  if  they  will  re- 
pent and  come  unto  me :  for  mine  arm  is  lengthened  out  all  the  day  long,  saith 
the  Lord  God  of  hosts. 

"But  behold,  there  shall  be  many  at  that  day,  when  I  shall  proceed  to  do  a 
marvelous  work  among  them,  that  I  may  remember  my  covenants  which  I  have 
made  unto  the  children  of  men,  that  I  may  set  my  hand  again  the  second  time 
to  recover  my  people,  which  are  of  the  house  of  Israel ;  and  also,  that  I  may 
remember  the  promises  which  I  have  made  unto  thee,  Nephi,  and  also  unto  thy 
father,  that  I  would  remember  your  seed;  and  that  the  words  of  your  seed 
should  proceed  forth  out  of  my  mouth  unto  your  seed.  And  my  words  shall 
hiss  forth  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth,  for  a  standard  unto  my  people,  which  are 
of  the  house  of  Israel.  And  because  my  words  shall  hiss  forth,  many  of  the 
Gentiles  shall  say,  A  bible,  a  bible,  we  have  got  a  bible,  and  there  cannot  be 
any  more  bible.  "  But  thus  saith  the  Lord  God:  0  fools,  they  shall  have  a  bible; 
and  it  shall  proceed  forth  from  the  Jews,  mine  ancient  covenant  people.  And 
what  thank  they  the  Jews  for  the  bible  which  they  receive  from  them?  Yea, 
what  do  the  Gentiles  mean  ?  Do  they  remember  the  travels,  and  the  labors, 
and  the  pains  of  the  Jews,  and  their  diligence  unto  me,  in  bringing  forth  salva- 
tion unto  the  Gentiles? 

U0  ye  Gentiles,  have  ye  remembered  the  Jews,  mine  ancient  covenant  people? 
Nay;  but  ye  have  cursed  them,  and  have  hated  them,  and  have  not  sought  to 
recover  them.  But  behold,  1  will  return  all  these  things  upon  your  own  heads; 
for  I,  the  Lord,  hath  not  forgotten  my  people.  Thou  fool,  that  shall  say,  A  bible, 
we  have  got  a  bible,  and  we  need  no  more  bible.  Have  ye  obtained  a  bible, 
save  it  were  by  the  Jews  ?  Know  ye  not  that  there  are  more  nations  than  one  ? 
Know  ye  not  that  I,  the  Lord  your  God,  have  created  all  men,  and  that  I  re- 
member those  who  are  upon  the  isles  of  the  sea;  and  that  I  rule  in  the  heavens 
above,  and  in  the  earth  beneath ;  and  I  bring  forth  my  word  unto  the  children 
of  men,  yea,  even  upon  all  the  nations  of  the  earth?  Wherefore  murmur  ye, 
because  that  ye  receive  more  of  my  word?  Know  ye  not  that  the  testimony 
of  two  nations  is  a  witness  unto  you  that  I  am  God,  that  I  remember  one  na- 
tion like  unto  another?  Wherefore,  I  speak  the  same  words  unto  one  nation 
like  unto  another  And  when  the  two  nations  shall  run  together,  the  testimony 
of  the  two  nations  shall  run  together  also.  And  I  do  this  that  I  may  prove  unto 
many,  that  I  am  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever;  and  that  I  speak  forth 
my  words  according  to  mine  own  pleasure.  And  because  that  I  have  spoken 
one  word,  ye  need  not  suppose  that  I  cannot  speak  another;  for  my  work  is  not 
yet  finished;  neither  shall  it  be,  until  the  end  of  man;  neither  from  that  time 
henceforth  and  forever. 

"Wherefore,  because  that  ye  have  a  bible,  ye  need  not  suppose  that  it  contains 
all  my  words;  neither  need  ye  suppose  that  I  have  not  caused  more  to  be  written : 
for  I  command  all  men,  both  in  the  east,  and  in  the  west,  and  in  the  north,  and 


170  The  Divine  Calling  of 

in  the  south,  and  in  the  islands  of  the  sea,  that  they  shall  write  the  words  which 
I  speak  unto  them:  for  out  of  the  books  which  shall  be  written,  I  will  judge  the 
world,  every  man  according  to  their  works,  according  to  that  which  is  written. 
For  behold,  I  shall  speak  unto  the  Jews,  and  they  shall  write  it :  and  I  shall 
also  speak  unto  the  Nephites,  and  they  shall  write  it;  and  I  shall  also  speak 
unto  the  other  tribes  of  the  house  of  Israel,  which  I  have  led  away,  and  they 
shall  write  it;  and  I  shall  also  speak  unto  all  nations  of  the  earth,  and  they  shall 
write  it."— 2  Nephi  12 : 1-8. 

"Hearken,  0,  ye  Gentiles,  and  hear  the  words  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God,  which  he  hath  commanded  me  that  I  should  speak  concerning  you, 
for,  behold  he  commandeth  me  that  I  should  write,  saying,  Turn,  all  ye  Gentiles, 
from  your  wicked  ways,  and  repent  of  your  evil  doings,  of  your  lyings  and  de- 
ceivings,  and  of  your  whoredoms,  and  of  your  secret  abominations,  and  your 
idolatries,  and  of  your  murders,  and  of  your  priestcrafts,  and  your  envyings,  and 
your  strifes,  and  from  all  your  wickedness  and  abominations,  and  come  unto  me, 
and  be  baptized  in  my  name,  that  ye  may  receive  a  remission  of  your  sins,  and 
be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  ye  may  be  numbered  with  my  people,  who 
are  of  the  house  of  Israel." — Nephi  14: 1. 

"And  behold,  their  prayers  were  also  in  behalf  of  him  that  the  Lord  should 
suffer  to  bring  these  things  forth.  And  no  one  need  say,  that  they  shall  not 
come,  for  they  surely  shall,  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it;  for  out  of  the  earth 
shall  they  come,  by  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  and  none  can  stay  it;  and  it  shall 
come  in  a  day  when  it  shall  be  said  that  miracles  are  done  away;  and  it  shall 
come  even  as  if  one  should  speak  from  the  dead. 

"And  it  shall  come  in  a  day  when  the  blood  of  the  saints  shall  cry  unto  the 
Lord,  because  of  secret  combinations  and  the  works  of  darkness;  yea,  it  shall 
come  in  a  day  when  the  power  of  God  shall  be  denied,  and  churches  become 
defiled,  and  shall  be  lifted  up  in  the  pride  of  their  hearts;  yea,  even  in  a  day 
when  leaders  of  churches,  and  teachers,  in  the  pride  of  their  hearts,  even  to  the 
envying  of  them  who  belong  to  their  churches;  yea,  it  shall  come  in  a  day  when 
there  shall  be  heard  of  fires,  and  tempests,  and  vapors  of  smoke  in  foreign  lands; 
and  there  shall  also  be  heard  of  wars  and  rumors  of  wars,  and  earthquakes  in 
divers  places;  yea,  it  shall  come  in  a  day  when  there  shall  be  great  pollutions 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth ;  there  shall  be  murders  and  robbing,  and  lying,  and 
deceivings,  and  whoredoms,  and  all  manner  of  abominations,  when  there  shall 
be  many  who  will  say,  Do  this,  or  do  that,  and  it  mattereth  not,  for  the  Lord 
will  uphold  such  at  the  last  day.  But  wo  unto  such,  for  they  are  in  the  gall  of 
bitterness,  and  in  the  bonds  of  iniquity.  Yea,  it  shall  come  in  a  day  when  there 
shall  be  churches  built  up  that  shall  say,  Come  unto  me,  and  for  your  money 
you  shall  be  forgiven  of  your  sins.  0  ye  wicked,  and  perverse,  and  stiff-necked 
people,  why  have  you  built  up  churches  unto  yourselves  to  get  gain?  Why 
have  ye  transfigured  the  holy  word  of  God,  that  ye  might  bring  damnation  upon 
your  soul?  Behold,  look  ye  unto  the  revelations  of  God.  For  behold,  the 
time  cometh  at  that  day  when  all  these  things  must  be  fulfilled. 

"Behold,  the  Lord  hath  shown  unto  me  great  and  marvelous  things  concern- 
ing that  which  must  shortly  come  at  that  day  when  these  things  shall  come 
forth  among  you.  Behold,  I  speak  unto  you  as  if  you  were  present,  and  yet  ye 
are  not.  But  behold,  Jesus  Christ  hath  shown  you  unto  me,  and  I  know  your 
doing;  and  I  know  that  ye  do  walk  in  the  pride  of  your  hearts;  and  there  are 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  171 

none,  save  a  few  only,  who  do  not  lift  themselves  up  hi  the  pride  of  their  hearts, 
unto  the  wearing  of  very  fine  apparel,  unto  envying,  and  strifes,  and  malice,  and 
persecutions,  and  all  manner  of  iniquities;  and  your  churches,  yea,  even  every 
one,  have  become  polluted  because  of  the  pride  of  your  hearts.  For  behold,  ye 
do  love  money,  and  your  substances,  and  your  fine  apparel,  and  the  adorning  of 
your  churches,  more  than  ye  love  the  poor  and  the  needy,  the  sick  and  the 
afflicted.  0  ye  pollutions,  ye  hypocrites,  ye  teachers,  who  sell  yourselves  for 
that  which  will  canker,  why  have  ye  polluted  the  holy  church  of  God?  Why 
are  ye  ashamed  to  take  upon  you  the  name  of  Christ?  Why  do  you  not  think 
that  greater  is  the  value  of  an  endless  happiness,  than  that  misery  which  never 
dies,  Because  of  the  praise  of  the  world.  Why  do  ye  adorn  yourselves  with 
that  which  hath  no  life,  and  yet  suffer  the  hungry,  and  the  needy,  and  the  naked, 
and  the  sick,  and  the  afflicted  to  pass  by  you,  and  notice  them  not?  Yea,  why. 
do  ye  build  up  your  secret  abominations  to  get  gain,  and  cause  that  widows 
should  mourn  before  the  Lord,  and  also  orphans  to  mourn  before  the  Lord,  and 
also  the  blood  of  their  fathers  and  their  husbands  to  cry  unto  the  Lord  from  the 
ground,  for  vengeance  upon  your  heads?  Behold  the  sword  of  vengeance 
hangeth  over  you ;  and  the  time  soon  cometh  that  he  avengeth  the  blood  of  the 
saints  upon  you,  for  he  will  not  suffer  their  cries  any  longer." — Mormon  4: 2-4. 

These  predictions  clearly  portray  (1)  the  condition  of  the  world  for 
the  past  fifty  years,  and  (2)  point  clearly  to  the  terrible  apostasy  in  the 
church  of  the  saints,  and  (3)  to  the  important  fact  that  said  apostasy 
would  be  caused  by  the  ministry,  of  whom  it  says,  "0  ye  pollutions, 
ye  hypocrites,  ye  teachers,  who  sell  yourselves  for  that  which  will 
canker,  why  have  you  polluted  the  holy  church  of  God."  "Yea, 
why  do  ye  build  up  your  secret  abominations  to  get  gain,  and  cause 
that  widows  should  mourn  before  the  Lord,  and  also  orphans  to 
mourn  before  the  Lord ;  and  also  the  blood  of  their  fathers  and  their 
husbands  to  cry  unto  the  Lord  from  the  ground  for  vengeance  upon 
your  heads.  Behold,  the  sword  of  vengeance  hangeth  over  you/'  &c. 
These  prophecies  are  plain,  and  full;  and  they  are  having  most  pre- 
cise and  literal  fulfillment.  Surely,  these  prophecies  were  inspired 
of  God,  for  no  man,  learned  or  unlearned,  could  have  conjectured 
so  many  strange  and  unlikely  events — events  so  contrary  to  what 
was  fondly  expected  in  the  times  at,  and  before  the  coming  forth  of 
the  Book  of  Mormon.  The  moral  doctrines  of  the  book  are  fully 
equal  to  any  ever  given  to  man.  No  purer  system  can  be  conceived 
of.  It  embraces  all  the  moral  excellencies  of  the  New  Testament, 
whilst  it  is  quite  free  from  teachings  of  such  questionable  morality 
as  are  found  in  1  Cor.  7  chapter;  Rom.  7 : 17,  25;  3:7;  1  Cor.  6  : 
12,  etc.,  etc.,  as  found  in  the  common  version. 

Its  theology  is  strictly  Biblical,  and  Christian;  its  religious  rites 
and  ceremonies  are  identical  with  those  of  the  Now  Testament,  as 


172  The  Divine  Calling  of 

also  its  church  polity  and  organization,  though  they  are  more  clearly 
defined,  and  promulgated,  and  with  greater  emphasis. 

Its  style  is  plain,  and  ancient;  its  language  is  simple,  comprehen- 
sive, and  utterly  free  from  cultured  finish,  scholarly  taste,  or  learned 
structure  and  order. 

That  any  one  of  judgment,  on  reading  the  book,  could  for  one  mo- 
ment think  that  Kev.  Mr.  Spaulding,  a  man  of  poetic  nature,  roman- 
tic tastes,  and  high  scholastic  attainments,  ever  wrote  the  book,  or 
even  one  page  of  it,  is  more  than  we  can  believe.  Had  he,  or  any 
man  of  finished  education  written  the  book,  their  scholarly  attain- 
ments would  have  been  manifest  in  the  style,  language,  and  arrage- 
ment  of  the  book. 

Further;  if  Mr.  Spaulding,  a  Congregational  (or  Presbyterian) 
minister  wrote  the  book,  he  would  have  filled  it  with  his  doctrine 
instead  of  advocating  in  it  such  doctrines  as  are  found  in  the  book, 
many  of  which  are  in  no  sense  Congregational,  but  rather  un-Con- 
gregational.  Every  chapter,  and  every  paragraph,  in  the  book,  ut- 
terly refutes  the  idea  that  a  cultivated  minister,  Protestant  or  Cath- 
olic, ever  wrote  a  page  of  the  book.  Such  an  idea  is  too  palpably 
false  to  need  a  lengthy  refutation.  And  as  for  the  inexperienced  and 
uneducated  youth,  Joseph  Smith's  writing  or  dictating  the  book,  as  is 
rather  claimed  by  Mr.  Sheldon,  none  but  those  possessed  of  prejudice 
and  a  partisan  spirit,  or  those  wanting  fair  common  sense,  could  en- 
dorse such  an  idea.  That  Joseph  Smith,  without  the  inspiration  of 
God,  could  write  that  book,  abounding  as  it  does  in  the  most  accu- 
rate items  of  history,  declaring  improbable  historical  facts,  facts  which 
have  since  been  fully  attested  by  the  antiquarian  and  the  geologist; 
disseminating  a  system  of  morals  and  religion  that  challenges  the 
criticism,  and  that  is  worthy  of  the  admiration  of  the  race;  and  pub- 
lishing a  series  of  prophecies  the  most  important  and  startling,  many 
of  which  are  being  fulfilled  under  our  own  observation, ^that  he  could 
do  such  a  work,  under  such  conditions,  it  would  be  for  more  diffi- 
cult to  believe,  than  to  believe  what  he  claims,  viz.,  the  guidance  and 
inspiration  of  God. 

Mr.  S.  avers  that  "the  Book  of  Mormon  makes  the  finder  and 
translator  of  that  book  a  Gentile."  This  is  another  of  that  large 
class  of  false  assumptions  we  have  had  to  deal  with  all  the  way 
through  this  work.  That  "the  finder  and  translator"  of  the  Book 
of  Mormon  was  a  citizen  of  a  Gentile  nation,  and  in  that  sense  was 
a  Gentile,  we  freely  admit;  but  that  he  was  of  Gentile  lineage,  the 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  173 

thing  claimed  by  Mr.  S.,  we  deny.  Paul  was  a  Roman  citizen, 
Acts  22 : 27,  and  yet  a  Jew  by  lineage,  v.  3.  The  "Parthians,  and 
Medes,  and  Elamites,"  of  Acts  2  :  9,  were  by  lineage  Jews,  no  doubt, 
and  only  citizens  of  those  nations,  v.  5.  So  Joseph  Smith  was  a 
Gentile  in  his  citizenship,  though  an  Israelite  by  lineage,  as  is 
claimed  by  the  Book  of  Mormon,  2  Nephi  2 : 2,  3. 
Mr.  S.  says: 

"It  is  insisted  that  the  true  church  is  a  miracle-working  church — and  that 
such  are  the  people  called  Mormons.  Both  the  Josephites  and  the  Brighamites 
use  this  argument  to  outsiders." 

Whilst  it  is  insisted  by  the  "  Josephites"  that  the  church  of  Christ 
should  enjoy  miraculous  powers  and  blessings,  it  is  also  true  that 
the  Utah  Mormons,  in  Utah,  are  not  only  barren  of  these  divine 
favors,  but  that  they  there  in  Utah  teach  that  they  are  no  longer 
needed,  they  having  "the  living  oracles"  to  edify  and  perfect  them. 
It  is  unquestionably  true  that  ministers  belonging  to  the  Utah  organ- 
ization, who  received  their  priesthood  in  a  regular  line  from  Joseph 
and  Oliver,  did,  so  long  as  they  faithfully  preached  the  gospel  and 
ministered  in  righteousness,  possess  and  enjoy  the  Spirit  of  God,  and 
at  times  in  great  power,  and  very  notably  before  the  doctrines  of  po- 
lygamy, Adam-God,  and  corrupt  tithing  were  thrust  upon,  and  forced 
into,  the  church. 

Mr.  S.,  in  order  to  throw  discredit  upon  the  claim  of  the  Saints 
that  the  same  kind  of  church  organization  is  needed  now  in  the  per- 
fect Church  of  Christ  as  was  had  in  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  says : 

'•In  the  true  church  order,  G-od  has  set  apostles,  it  is  true,  but  simply  as  ma- 
terial for  the  foundation,  and  not  as  rafters  to  the  building. 

Very  well,  but  is  it  not  essential  that  the  church  should  always 
have  the  same  kind  of  a  foundation?  And  when  one  part  of  the 
foundation  of  the  church  is  removed  by  death  or  apostasy,  is  it  not 
essential  that  the  want  created  by  such  removal  should  be  supplied  ? 
If  not,  why  was  Matthias,  the  thirteenth  apostle  in  number,  chosen 
to  fill  the  place  of  Judas?  and  why  were  "the  apostles,  Barnabas 
and  Paul,"  (Acts  14 : 14),  chosen  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  ordained 
by  the  ministry?  (Acts  13 : 1-4),  and  why  did  the  church  at  Ephe- 
sus,  ninety-six  years  after  Christ,  willingly  consent  to  try  them  who 
said  they  were  apostles?  (Rev.  2:2).  Paul,  in  speaking  of  the 
church,  says  Christ  "gave  some,  apostles;  and  some,  prophets;  and 
gome,  evangelists;  and  some,  pastors  and  teachers." — Eph.  4:11. 
Now  there  is  just  as  much  authority  for  discarding  the  evangelists, 


174  The  Divine  Calling  of 

and  pastors  and  teachers,  as  for  discarding  the  others.  Paul  says 
the  officers,  all  of  them,  were  given  for  the  < 'perfecting  of  the  Saints, 
for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  for  the  edifying  [building  up]  of  the 
body  of  Christ/' — Eph.  4:12.  And  he  tells  us  how  long  the  Lord 
intended  them  to  continue  in  this  church: — 

"Till  we  all  come  in  [into]  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fullness 
of  Christ."— Eph.  4:13. 

And  he  tells  us  why  these  officers  were  given : — 

"That  we  henceforth  be  no  more  children,  tossed  to  and  fro,  and  carried  about 
by  every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  sleight  of  men,  and  cunning  craftiness,  where- 
by they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive." — Eph.  4: 14. 

No  one  questions  but  that  evangelists,  pastors,  and  teachers, 
should  now  be  in  the  church,  yet  there  is  more  reason  for  setting 
them  aside  as  unnecessary,  than  for  setting  aside  apostles  and  proph- 
ets, for  the  latter  are  the  most  important. 

Again,  Paul,  after  describing  the  gifts  and  administrations  of 
"the  one  Spirit,"  proceeds  to  say  to  the  Church: 

"Xow  ye  are  the  body  of  Christ,  and  members  in  particular.  And  G-od  hath 
set  some  in  the  church,  first  apostles,  secondarily  prophets,  thirdly  teachers, 
after  that  miracles,  then  gifts  of  healings,  helps,  governments,  diversities  of 
tongues." — 1  Cor.  12:27,  28. 

Here  the  Church  of  Christ  is  compared  to  the  body  of  man,  united, 
compacted,  and  vitally  connected  together  in  all  its  parts.  Of  this 
another  wisely  remarks : 

"If  his  illustrations  be  worth  anything,  then  a  church  which  has  not  for  its 
members  persons  possessed  of  all  these  varied  gifts,  is  no  more  a  [perfect] 
Church  of  Christ  than  a  body  is  a  human  body  without  its  members.  A  Chris- 
tian, living  church  must  have  members  qualified  and  endowed  from  the  Spirit, 
with  all  these  gifts,  or  it  is  destitute  of  its  members.  They  are  no  more  living, 
real  members  than  a  wooden  leg,  or  an  artificial  hand,  or  a  glass  eye  is  a  mem- 
ber of  the  human  body.  A  church  must  have  its  spiritual  members,  living  and 
•complete,  or  it  is  no  body  of  Christ." 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  175 


CHAPTER  IX. 

We  now  propose  to  consider  the  direct  question,  Was  Joseph 
Smith  a  prophet  of  God? 

And  before  we  proceed  with  the  main  thread  of  our  argument, 
and  the  chief  lines  of  our  proof,  we  pause  to  briefly  notice  what  Mr. 
S.  urges  as  a  clear  proof  that,  if  Joseph  was  a  prophet  at  all,  then 
he  was  a  false  prophet.  Mr.  S.  says : 

"If  Joseph  really  introduced  polygamy,  it  is  another  proof  to  Josephites  that 
he  is  a  false  prophet." 

Mr.  S.  should  not  stop  here,  but  slash  away  at  the  prophetic  and 
apostolic  claims  of  others  on  similar  grounds.  He  should  tell  us  that, 
if  Noah  got  intoxicated  on  wine,  then  he  was  a  false  prophet;  and  that 
if  Abraham  and  Jacob  practiced  polygamy,  then  they  were  false 
prophets;  and  that  if  Moses  killed  an  Egyptian  and  hid  him  in  the 
sand,  and  if  Aaron  turned  to  idolatry  while  Moses  was  in  the  mount, 
then  they  were  false  prophets;  and  if  Samuel  hewed  Agag,  the 
prisoner,  to  pieces;  and  if  David  murdered  Uriah  and  committed 
adultery  with  Bathshebah,  and  if  Gideon  went  into  polygamy  and 
idolatry,  then  they  were  false  prophets;  and,  finally,  that  if  Peter 
cursed  and  swore,  and  denied  Christ,  and  dissembled,  then  he  was 
a  false  apostle,  and  was  never  an  apostle  of  Christ.  O  consistency! 
thy  name  is  not  Sheldon ! 

In  the  first  place,  we  know  not  whether  Joseph  the  Seer  did  or 
did  not  practice  and  teach  polygamy.  If  he  did  either,  it  was  done 
very  secretly,  and  it  was  done  against  the  law  and  order  of  the 
Church,  and  against  the  teachings  and  protests  of  himself  and  Hy- 
rum  up  to  as  late  as  the  Spring  of  1844. 

Many  good  men  of  times  gone  by  have  gone  into  polygamy  and 
kindred  evils,  and  yet  it  did  not  prove  that  they  were  never  the  ser- 
vants of  God.  Mr.  S.  tells  us  that  "Mrs.  Young,  No.  19,  mentions 
a  plural  marriage  performed  by  Joseph  himself."  Mrs.  Young  is 
not  a  competent  witness  in  this  case,  as  she  was  not  born  until  near 


176  The  Divine  Calling  of 

the  time  of  Joseph's  death.  All  she  could  know  of  the  case  would 
be  simply  by  rumor.  And  when  one  so  incompetent  makes  charges 
of  such  a  grave  character  their  evidence  should  be  treated  as  of  no 
great  or  certain  value.  Besides  this,  "Mrs.  Young,  No.  19,"  has  in 
other  ways  shown  herself  an  utterly  unsafe  witness,  when  she 
publishes  that  Joseph  claimed  to  be  a  new  Messiah !  And  when 
she  publishes  that  Joseph  counselled  a  man  at  Nauvoo  to  go  down 
the  river  to  a  Gentile  saw  mill  and  steal  a  lot  of  black  walnut  lum- 
ber for  coffins!  And  that  the  man  went  and  did  as  counselled,  and 
rafted  the  lumber  up  the  river  to  the  city  of  the  Saints!  Mr.  S.r 
can't  you  see  how  easy  this  thing  was  done? — can't  you  see  the 
man  stealing  that  lumber,  and  making  that  raft,  and  floating  it  up 
over  the  rapids,  against  a  current  running  from  four  to  eight  miles 
per  hour,  and  no  one  to  see  or  hear  this  lumber  thief  till  he  safely 
lands  his  booty  in  the  city?  Of  course  you  can  see  it,  for  "No.  19" 
is  just  your 'kind  of  a  witness;  her  testimony  is  off  the  same  piece 
with  that  you  are  using  to  prove  Joseph  a  false  prophet  and  the 
Book  of  Mormon  untrue;  and  of  course  you  can  see  the  "eternal  fit- 
ness" of  her  testimony,  and  accept  it  for  diamond  truth !  But  you 
must  pardon  others  if  they  don't  see  quite  so  easily  as  you  do. 

Joseph  Smith;  was  he  a  prophet  of  God?  Popular  opinion  an- 
swers no;  and  if  we  were  to  judge  of  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ, 
or  any  of  the  ancient  prophets,  by  the  same  rule,  it  would  give  us 
the  same  result;  for  not  one-fifth  part  of  the  human  family  now  even 
profess  to  believe  Christianity. 

Popular  opinion  is  not  the  rule  of  evidence  by  which  to  deter- 
mine the  truth  or  falsity  of  any  fact  or  principle.  The  rankest 
errors  in  religion,  in  philosophy,  and  in  science,  have  been  highly 
popular  in  their  time.  Known  truth  is  the  touch-stone  by  which  to 
try  everything  claiming  to  be  true  or  divine. 

All  true  principles  harmonize.  The  truths  of  philosophy,  of  the 
sciences,  of  history,  and  of  divine  religion  and  revelation,  do  not, 
and  cannot  conflict.  They  will  ever,  when  rightly  understood,  be 
found  to  perfectly  agree. 

We  test  the  divinity  of  the  mission  of  Moses  and  the  prophets  by 
comparing  their  teachings  with  known  truths.  The  grandest  prin- 
ciples connected  with  geology,  astronomy,  chemistry,  and  physiology, 
are  outlined  in  their  teachings.  The  facts  of  written  history,  and 
of  universal  tradition,  and  of  history  as  lately  discovered  chiselled  on 
the  stony  walls  of  ancient  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  cities,  and  their 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  177 

crumbling  tombs  and  monuments  are  also  found  in  their  writings. 
All  these  are  witnesses  for  Moses  and  the  prophets.  But  the  strong- 
est external  evidence  that  can  be  had, — evidence  that  should  fully 
satisfy  every  one, — is  the  exact  agreement  between  the  predictions 
of  these  men,  and  the  facts  of  subsequent  history.  They  predict, 
with  a  "Thus  saith  the  Lord,"  that  certain  events  will  transpire, — 
events  which  human  sagacity  could  not  foresee, — and  history,  the 
faithful  chronicler  of  events  as  they  occur,  testifies  that  the  events 
predicted  did  transpire. 

True  prophecy  was  always  regarded  by  God's  people  as  one  of  the 
crowning  evidences  of  divinity;  and  it  was  so  taught  by  Jesus  and 
the  prophets,  as  may  be  seen  by  Isaiah  41 : 21-23;  Ezek.  33:33; 
John  13  : 19,  etc. 

We  read  that  the  early  Christians  vanquished  their  opponents 
successfully  by  showing  the  fulfillment  of  the  predictions  of  Moses 
and  the  prophets,  and  especially  of  Jesus  and  the  apostles. 

We  propose  to  discuss  the  prophetic  character  and  mission  of  Jo- 
seph Smith,  in  the  light  of  historical  facts,  mainly,  if  not  entirely, 
as  compared  with  his  prophecies. 

Joseph,  when  a  boy  aged  seventeen  years,  began  to  know  his  mar- 
velous and  wonderful  mission.  This  was  as  early  as  1823.  At  that 
time,  and  from  that  time  on,  the  chief  part  of  Christendom  was  so- 
lacing itself  with  the  thought  that  the  world  was  rapidly  improving 
in  morals  and  religion.  Many  thought  that  the  millennium  would 
soon  be  ushered  in  through  the  joint  efforts  of  the  pulpit,  the  press, 
and  missionary  labors.  And  it  was  under  the  inspiration  of  this 
idea,  no  doubt,  that  the  "World's  Peace  Congresses"  were  projected. 
In  the  midst  of  these  things,  and  in  opposition  to  these  sentiments, 
Joseph  pronounced  the  "Thus  saith  the  Lord,"  and  predicted  the 
rise  and  rapid  spread  of  social,  political  and  spiritual  corruption.  He 
declared  that  iniquity  would  increase  and  abound,  and  that  judg- 
ment would  rapidly  multiply  among  the  wicked;  that  there  would 
be  great  "divisions"  among  the  people;  that  there  would  be  great 
contentions,  strifes  and  wars;  that  there  would  be  unusual  tempests, 
earthquakes,  plagues,  pestilences  and  famines;  that  there  would 
be  terribly  destructive  fires ;  that  the  sea  would  be  greatly  troubled ; 
and  that  these  things  would  continue  to  occur  till  the  glorious  ap- 
pearing of  the  Lord  Jesus,  which,  he  said,  was  near  at  hand. 

In  short,  he  predicted  the  very  opposite  of  what  was  taught  by 
the  worldly-wise  and  prudent,  and  what  was  fondly  believed  by  the 


178  The  Divine  Calling  of 

masses.  In  May,  1829,  he  predicted  that  the  church  he  was  about 
to  found  and  organize,  would  become  "a  great  and  marvelous  work 
among  the  children  of  men/' — D.  &  C.  11:1.  Such  is  its  history 
already,  though  it  has  but  fairly  begun  its  work.  In  March  of  the 
same  year  he  predicted  the  coming  of  the  cholera  "scourge;"  and 
that  it  would  continue  its  ravages  among  the  nations,  from  time  to 
time,  till  the  earth  became  "empty." — D.  &  C.  4:3.  The  first  case 
cholera  in  Western  Europe  occurred  in  1831 ;  in  Great  Britain  in 
1832;  and  in  North  America,  in  the  summer  of  the  same  year; 
though  it  had  existed  in  some  parts  of  Asia  for  many  years  before 
this.  The  most  eminent  physicians  pronounce  it  a  "dreadful  scourge," 
and  state  that  its  "essential  character,  and  true  origin  are  yet  entirely 
unknown." 

He  predicted  that  "the  weak  and  simple"  would  proclaim  the 
fullness  of  the  gospel  "unto  the  ends  of  the  world,  and  before  kings 
and  rulers." — D.  &  C.  1 : 4.  And  an  unlettered  and  inexperienced 
ministry  has  been  fulfilling  this  since  1830. 

In  1831  he  predicted  that  the  time  was  near  "when  peace  shall 
be  taken  from  the  earth,  and  the  devil  shall  have  power  over  his 
own  dominion;  and  also  the  Lord  shall  have  power  over  his  Saints, 
and  shall  reign  in  their  midst,  and  shall  come  down  in  judgment  on 
Idumea,  or  the  world." — D.  &  C.  1:6.  Here  is  predicted  the 
marked  development  of  Satanic  influence  and  working;  its  preva- 
lence and  power  in  contradistinction  to  the  power  of  God.  The  last 
twenty-six  years  have  witnessed  the  fulfillment  of  this  prediction  in 
a  most  wonderful  degree,  as  the  reader  must  be  aware,  at  least  so 
far  as  relates  to  the  doings  of  those  "spirit  manifestations,"  so  utter- 
ly opposed  to  Bible  Christianity. 

In  March,  1831,  he  prophesied  that  soon  there  would 

uBe  heard  of  wars  and  rumors  of  wars,  and  the  whole  earth  shall  be  in  com- 
motion, and  men's  hearts  shall  fail  them,  and  they  shall  say  that  Christ  delay eth 
his  coming  until  the  end  of  the  earth.  And  the  love  of  men  shall  wax  cold,  and 
iniquity  shall  abound;  *  *  *  and  there  shall  be  earthquakes,  also,  in  divers 
places,  and  many  desolations ;  yet  men  will  harden  their  hearts  against  me, 
[Christ],  and  they  will  take  up  the  sword  one  against  another,  and  they  Tvill 
kill  one  another.  *  *  *  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  he  that  feareth  me, 
[Christ],  shall  be  looking  forth  for  the  great  day  of  the  Lord  to  come,  even  for 
the  signs  of  the  comiag  of  the  Son  of  Man ;  and  they  shall  see  signs  and  won- 
ders, for  they  shall  be  shown  forth  in  the  heavens  above,  and  in  the  earth  be- 
neath ;  and  they  shall  behold  blood,  and  fire,  and  vapors  of  smoke ;  and  before 
the  day  of  the  Lord  shall  come,  the  sun  shall  be  darkened,  and  the  moon  be 
turned  into  blood,  and  stars  fall  from  heaven;  and  the  remnant  [Jews]  shall 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  179 

be  gathered  unto  this  place,  [Jerusalem],  and  then  they  shall  look  for  me,  and 
behold  I  will  come;  and  they  shall  see  me  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  clothed  with 
power  and  great  glory,  with  all  the  holy  angels,  and  he  that  watches  not  for  me 
shall  be  cut  off."— D.  &  C.  45:4,  6. 

Many  of  the  items  in  the  foregoing  prophecies  have  been  fulfill- 
ed, or  are  in  process  of  fulfillment,  while  some  remain  to  be  fulfilled 
at  no  distant  day.  In  December,  1832,  he  prophesied  to  the  Elders- 
as  follows: 

"And,  after  your  testimony,  cometh  wrath  and  indignation  upon  the  people; 
for  after  your  testimony  cometh  the  testimony  of  earthquakes,  that  shall  cause 
groanings  in  the  midst  of  her,  and  men  shall  fall  upon  the  ground  and  shall  not 
be  able  to  stand.  And  also  cometh  the  voice  of  thunderings,  and  the  voice  of 
lightnings,  and  the  voice  of  tempests,  and  the  voice  of  the  ivaves  of  the  sea,  heaving 
themselves  beyond  their  bounds.  And  all  things  shall  be  in  commotion ;  and  sure- 
ly men's  hearts  shall  fail  them;  for  fear  shall  come  upon  all  people." — D.  &  C. 
85:25. 

Within  the  past  twelve  years  "earthquakes'/  have  been  more  fre- 
quent, wide-spread,  and  terrible;  "thunderiwgs"  have  been  more 
common  and  frightful;  "lightnings"  have  been  more  fearful,  terrific r 
and  disastrous;  "tempests,"  tornadoes,  cyclones,  and  whirlwinds*, 
have  been  more  prevalent  and  destructive  than  ever  known  before- 
in  the  same  length  of  time.  These  are  facts  beyond  successful  ques- 
tion. 

In  October,  1864,  in  India,  the  waves  of  the  sea  were  driven  by 
a  cyclone,  inland,  and  many  thousands  of  lives  and  many  millions  of 
property  were  destroyed.  In  November,  1876,  in  the  same  region, 
a  cyclone  drove  the  waters  of  the  sea  over  one  of  the  largest  and 
most  populous  islands,  destroying  257,000  human  lives,  with  an  im- 
mense amount  of  property.  In  1867,  at  the  Island  of  St.  Thomas, 
the  waves  rose  sixty  or  seventy  feet  higher  than  common,  and 
"heaved  themselves  beyond  their  bounds,"  carrying  upon  their  crests* 
a  United  States  war  steamer,  and  leaving  it  high  and  dry  on  land. 
In  1868,  I  think  in  June,  at  the  Sandwich  Islands,  the  waves  rose 
fifty  to  sixty  feet  higher  than  was  their  wont;  and  "heaved  them- 
selves beyond  their  bounds,"  washing  away  a  number  of  the  little 
coast  towns,  destroying  life  and  property.  In  August  of  the  same 
year  occurred  "the  great  tidal  wave"  which  beat  along  the  Pacific- 
coast  from  the  bay  of  San  Francisco  on  the  north,  to  near  Cape 
Horn  on  the  south.  At  the  bay  of  Valparaiso,  and  other  contigu- 
ous sea  ports,  the  waves  rose  fifty  to  seventy  feet  higher  than  usual, 
tearing  the  shipping  loose  from  its  anchorage  in  many  places,  and 


180  The  Divine  Calling  of 

bearing  the  largest  vessels  in  upon  the  dry  land,  destroying  a  great 
many  lives  and  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  property.  By  what 
means  could  Joseph  predict  these  numerous  and  remarkable  events 
so  clearly?  Only  by  the  Spirit  that  foresees  and  foreknows! — the 
Spirit  of  the  living  God ! 

In  the  same  prophecy  he  also  tells  us  that  "all  things  shall  be  in 
commotion/'  How  true  we  find  this  to-day!  Every  department  of 
society,  political,  social,  commercial,  scientific,  and  religious,  is  great- 
ly agitated — is  in  great  commotion.  This  is  true  of  America,  of 
Europe,  of  Asia,  of  Africa, — of  every  place.  The  humblest  peasant, 
and  the  mightiest  prince;  the  Pope  with  his  triple  crown,  and  the 
cloistered  monk;  high  church-men  and  low  church-men;  Pagan, 
Parsee,  Christian,  and  Jew, — all  partake  of  this  portentous  spirit  of 
-restlessness, — this  ceaseless  commotion.  And  the  elements,  too,  are 
unusually  agitated,  in  all  parts  of  the  earth ;  and  it  is  no  wonder 
-that  "men's  hearts  fail  them,"  and  that  "fear"  has  come,  and  is  com- 
ing, "upon  all  people." 

On  the  25th  of  December,  1832,  Joseph  Smith  received  a  revela- 
tion foreshowing  the  desolating  wars  and  fearful  judgments  of  the 
latter  days.  In  this  revelation  is  foretold  the  war  of  the  late  rebel- 
lion through  which  our  nation  passed  from  1860  to  1866,  which  re- 
sulted in  the  death  of  600,000  persons,  and  in  crippling  and  disa- 
bling by  disease  400,000  more.  The  revelation  was  first  printed  at 
Liverpool,  in  England,  in  1851.  in  a  pamphlet  entitled  "The  Pearl 
of  Great  Price,"  though  many  of  the  Saints  had  known  of  it  from 
1832.  Thousands  of  copies  of  this  work  are  still  in  existence,  in 
the  hands  of  the  Saints  and  others.  It  was  published  in  many  lan- 
guages, and  in  various  other  works,  at  different  times  before  the  re- 
bellion took  place,  and  among  them  the  "True  Latter  Day  Saints 
Herald,"  "The  Seer,"  and  "The  Compendium."  It  is  also  publish- 
ed in  Beadle's  work  against  the  Mormons,  issued  in  1870.  It  reads 
as  follows : 

"Verily,  thus  saith  the  Lord,  concerning  the  wars  that  will  shortly  come  to 
•pass,  beginning  at  the  rebellion  of  South  Carolina,  which  will  eventually  termi- 
nate in  the  death  and  misery  of  many  souls.  The  days  will  come  that  war 
will  be  poured  out  upon  all  nations,  beginning  at  that  place ;  for  behold  the 
^Southern  States  shall  be  divided  against  the  Northern  States,  and  the  Southern 
-States  will  call  on  other  nations,  even  the  nation  of  Great  Britain,  as  it  is  called, 
and  they  shall  also  call  upon  other  nations,  in  order  to  defend  themselves  against 
other  nations :  and  thus  shall  war  be  poured  out  upon  all  nations.  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass,  after  many  days,  slaves  shall  rise  up  against  their  masters,  who 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  181 

shall  be  marshaled  and  disciplined  for  war,  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  also,, 
that  the  remnants  who  are  left  of  the  land  shall  marshal  themselves,  and  shall 
become  exceeding  angry,  and  shall  vex  the  Gentiles  with  a  sore  vexation ;  and 
thus,  with  the  sword,  and  by  bloodshed,  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  shall  mourn  ^ 
and  with  famine,  and  plague,  and  earthquakes,  and  the  thunder  of  heaven,  and 
the  fierce  and  vivid  lightnings  also,  shall  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  be  made  to 
feel  the  wrath  and  indignation  and  chastening  hand  of  an  Almighty  God,  until 
the  consumption  decreed  hath  made  a  full  end  of  all  nations,  that  the  cry  of  the* 
Saints,  and  the  blood  of  the  Saints,  shall  cease  to  come  up  into  the  ears  of  the- 
Lord  of  Sabaoth,  from  the  earth,  to  be  avenged  of  their  enemies.  Wherefore,. 
stand  ye  in  holy  places,  and  be  not  moved,  until  the  day  of  the  Lord  come :  for 
behold  it  cometli  quickly,  saith  the  Lord.  Amen." 

This  is  one  of  the  most  remarkables  prophecies  of  this  or  any 
other  age.  It  is  lengthy,  definite,  precise,  full  of  eminent  points,, 
without  "ifs,"  or  '-buts,';  and  was  the  very  opposite  of  the  popular- 
ideas  of  the  times  in  which  it  was  given,  and  in  which  it  was  first; 
published. 

Some  claim  that  it  has  been  gotten  up  since  the  rebellion  to  suit 
the  events  transpiring  during  that  time.  They  see  that  it  contains- 
a  true  and  definite  summary  of  the  history  made  during  that  period,, 
yet  they  dislike  to  believe  that  Joseph  Smith  uttered  the  prophecy- 
Such  persons  usually  laud  and  glorify  the  prophets  of  the  long-ago., 
but  they  will  neither  hear,  investigate  the  claims  of,  nor  respect 
modern  prophets.  They  are  of  that  class  who  revere  the  seers  of" 
the  misty  past  who  lived,  and  taught,  and  suffered  two  thousand  or 
five  thousand  years  before  them, — but  Grod,  they  conclude,  will  hold] 
no  direct  communication  with  man  in  this  age  of  the  world,  and  a. 
claim  that  he  may,  and  does,  should  be  scoffed  at  as  an  imposture. 

As  we  have  shown,  there  is  an  abundance  of  documentary  evi- 
dence of  the  genuineness  of  the  revelation;  at  least  to  show  that  it 
was  in  existence — in  print — as  early  as  1851,  nine  years  before  the 
rebellion.  Mr.  Beadle,  in  his  work  against  the  Mormons,  states  that 
he  copied  it  out  of  '-The  Seer,"  a  work  published  by  0.  Pratt,  m 
Yv7ashington,  D.  C.,  in  1853,  seven  years  before  the  rebellion.  And 
Mr.  John  Hyde,  who  wrote  a  work  against  the  Mormons,  entitled 
"Mormonism,"  which  was  issued  by  Fetridge  &  Co.,  of  New  York 
City,  in  1857,  cites  on  page  174,  this  same  revelation,  and  he  did> 
it  in  order  to  prove  that  Joseph  was  a  false  prophet.  He  verily 
thought  within  himself,  no  doubt,  that  such  a  series  of  wars  and  ca- 
lamities as  Joseph  Smith  had  predicted  could  never  occur;  and  he 
probably  felt  fully  justified  in  denouncing  the  prophecy  as  false. 
Nor  was  he  alone  in  the  thought  that  such  things  could  never  occur. 


182  The  Divine  Calling  of 

It  was  the  universal  sentiment  with  all  people,  except  well-informed 
Latter  Day  Saints.  They  knew  of  the  prophecy  and  confidently 
looked  for  its  fulfillment. 

Such  an  event  as  the  rebellion  of  the  Southern  States  was  improb- 
able— highly  improbable  at  that  time — as  were  many,  if  not  all  the 
other  events  predicted  in  the  prophecy.  The  prophecy  states  what 
was  very  improbable,  that  "the  Southern  States  shall  be  divided 
against  the  Northern  States. "  And  yet  every  Southern  State  v:as 
arrayed  against  the  Northern  States  in  the  rebellion.  The  prophecy 
said  the  war  would  Legin  at  the  rebellion  of  South  Carolina.  South 
Carolina  began  the  rebellion,  December  20th,  1860;  and  on  the  12th 
of  the  following  March,  war  actually  began  by  the  Confederacy,  her 
troops  firing  upon,  and  capturing  Fort  Sumpter. 

The  Southern  States  did  "call  on  other  nations/' — upon  Great 
Britain  and  France,  and  this,  too,  in  order  to  "defend  themselves 
[diplomatically]  against  other  nations;"  for,  by  this  time,  they  had 
assumed  the  defensive,  as  the  revelation  teaches  they  finally  would 
do.  They  sought  to  be  recognized  by  the  nations  as  belligerents, 
and  thus  secure  themselves  against  the  influence  and  co-operation  of 
other  nations  in  favor  of  the  Northern  States;  and  further,  to  obtain 
material  aid  in  order  to  defend  themselves  against  the  invading 
armies  of  the  Northern  States. 

"And  thus  war  shall  be  poured  out  upon  all  nations;"  that  is, 
beginning  with  our  national  rebellion,  war  would  go  forth,  and  final- 
ly occur  among  all  nations.  It  is  a  prominent  fact,  that,  since  the 
beginning  of  the  rebellion,  war  has  been  unusually  prevalent,  wide- 
spread, and  sanguinary. 

Taking  advantage  of  our  national  troubles.  Louis  Napoleon,  Em- 
peror of  France,  and  Francis  Joseph,  Emperor  of  Austria,  sought,  by 
a  bloody  war,  to  establish  an  empire  in  Mexico,  and  to  place  Maxi- 
millian  upon  its  throne,  but  they  failed  in  the  attempt. 

South  America,  Central  America,  France,  Italy,  Austria,  Den- 
mark, Spain,  Cuba,  Holland,  Russia,  Germany,  Greece,  Turkey, 
Egypt,  Algeria,  China,  Japan,  Corea,  with  many  districts  in  Asia 
and  Africa,  have  been  visited  with  the  war-fiend  since  the  rebellion 
of  South  Carolina  in  1860. 

In  these  wars  millions  of  lives  have  been  lost  and  oceans  of  treas- 
ure expended;  but  the  end  is  not  yet.  The  spirit  of  war  seems  rife 
in  every  land  and  among  all  nations.  Ilussia,  the  "Gog"  of  Ezekiel 
38th  chapter,  is  just  now  entering  upon  a  war  with  Turkey,  of  huge 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  183 

dimensions,  and  one  likely  to  embroil  all  Europe,  and  Asia,  and 
northern  Africa;  and  one  that  will  materially  change  the  bounda- 
ries of  the  nations,  and  go  far  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  restoration 
of  Israel  and  Judah. 

The  war  equipments  of  the  nations,  by  land  and  sea,  are  far  more 
extensive  and  highly  perfected,  than  ever  before  known.  For  in- 
stance, the  forces  of  Austria  amount  at  present  to  856,980  men. 
Russia  has  augmented  her  armies  to  1,519,810  men.  The  aggregate 
military  strength  of  Italy  is  605,200.  The  German  empire  can  sum- 
mon to  the  field  1,261,160  men.  The  French  army  is  977,660 
strong.  The  land-forces  alone  of  Great  Britain  number  478,820 
men ;  besides  which  her  navy  is  the  largest  in  the  world.  The 
Swedish  army  numbers  about  274,510.  The  number  of  soldiers 
now  at  the  disposal  of  all  the  European  governments  amount  to  be- 
tween 6,000,000  and  7,000,000,  an  increase  of  over  one-third  in 
number  since  1859.  And  still  they  are  arming.  The  trust  of  na- 
tions to-day  is  mainly  in  their  strength,  their  wealth,  their  wisdom, 
and  their  military  prowess,  rather  than  in  truth  and  righteousness 
before  God,  and  with  man. 

"After  many  days,  slaves  shall  rise  up  against  their  masters,  who 
shall  be  marshaled  and  disciplined  for  war."  Not  less  than  200,000 
of  the  blacks  were  enrolled  in  the  armies  of  the  North;  and  they 
were,  as  the  prophecy  indicates,  "marshaled  and  disciplined,"  by 
white  officers;  and  their  arms  were  directed  against  their  former 
masters. 

These  are  facts  so  patent  that  comment  is  not  needed. 

And  "the  remnants  who  are  left  of  the  land,  [the  Indians],  will 
marshal  themselves,  and  shall  become  exceeding  angry,  and  shall 
vex  the  Gentiles  with  a  sore  vexation."  This  is  precisely  what  has 
been  done.  For  the  Indians  did  "marshal  themselves"  against  the 
whites  as  early  as  August,  1862,  and  they  have  been  waging  war 
against  them  from  time  to  time  until  the  present.  The  massacre  in 
Minnesota,  which  took  place  August,  1862,  was  a  terribly  cruel  and 
heart-rending  affair.  2,000  persons  were  barbarously  slaughtered 
in  a  few  hours.  Nameless  outrages  were  perpetrated;  and  the  losses 
sustained,  pecuniarily,  by  the  government  and  by  individuals,  amount- 
ed to  over  $2,500,000 : 

"From  the  landing  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  on  the  rock-bound  coast  of  New 
England,  in  the  winter  of  1620,  until  their  descendants  had  passed  the  center 
of  the  continent,  and  reached  the  lovely  plains  of  Minnesota,  no  exhibition  of 


184  The  Divine  Calling  of 

Indian  character  had  so  afflicted  and  appalled  the  soul  of  humanity,  as  the  fear- 
ful and  deliberate  massacre  perpetrated  by  them  in  August,  1862.  *  *  The 
blow  fell  like  a  storm  of  thunderbolts  from  the  clear,  bright  heavens.  The  storm 
of  fierce,  savage  murder,  in  its  most  horrid  and  frightful  forms,  rolled  on.  Day 
passed  and  night  came,  until  the  sad  catalogue  reached  the  fearful  jnumber  of 
two  thousand  human  victims,  from  the  gray-haired  sire  to  the  helpless  infant  of 
a  day,  who  lay  mangled  and  dead  on  the  ensanguined  field.  *  *  In  two  days 
the  whole  work  of  murder  was  done,  with  here  and  there  exceptional  cases  in 
differemt  settlements.  And,  during  these  two  days,  a  population  of  thirty  thou- 
sand, scattered  over  some  eight  counties,  on  the  western  borders  of  the  State, 
on  foot,  on  horseback,  with  teams  of  oxen  and  horses,  under  the  momentum  of 
the  panic  thus  created,  were  rushing  wildly  and  frantically  over  the  prairies  to 
places  of  safety." — Indian  Massacres. 

The  Indians  "marshaled  themselves,"  as  foreshown  in  the  proph- 
ecy,— no  whites  having  a  hand  in  that  matter.  The  bad  treatment 
which  they  had  received  from  the  whites — the  Indian  agents  and 
traders  in  particular — had  much  to  do  in  causing  these  outrages, — 
it  made  them  "exceeding  angry/' — yet,  as  we  have  said  before,  the 
whites  had  nothing  to  do  in  marshaling  them,  or  directing  them  in 
their  sanguinary  work. 

These  Indian  wars  are  costly  as  well  as  cruel;  and  hence,  in  more 
ways  than  one,  are  they  "a  sore  vexation"  to  our  tax-burdened  nation. 
It  has  been  reported  that  for  every  Indian  captured  and  killed  dur- 
ing some  of  the  Indian  wars  since  1862,  it  has  cost  the  whites  the 
lives  of  nine  white  men,  and  85,000,000  in  money.  This  may  be  a 
slight  exaggeration,  yet  it  is  probably  not  far  from  the  truth.  The 
enormous  expense,  with  the  loss  of  human  life,  and  the  various  per- 
plexities connected  with  these  wars,  and  the  whole  Indian  question, 
are  sources  of  "sore  vexation"  to  the  whites,  and  from  which  there 
are  no  prospects  of  speedy  and  permanent  relief. 

As  for  the  terrors  of  "famine  and  plague"  predicted,  they  have 
been  so  widespread  and  destructive  since  1860  that  the  bare  men- 
tion of  them  ought  to  satisfy  the  reader  of  the  truthfulness  of  this 
item  of  the  prophecy.  In  India  alone  there  has  been  numerous  fam- 
ines with  terrible  loss  of  life  since  1860,  prominent  among  them 
that  which  occurred  in  1866,  in  which  thousands  perished  of  starva- 
tion weekly.  The  official  report  showed  that  there  were  a  million 
of  deaths  in  all.  And  famine  is  raging  in  India  now. 

In  1867  and  1868  there  was  a  great  lack  of  food  supplies  in  the 
Southern  States;  and  in  England  and  France  hundreds  of  thousands 
were  in  a  state  of  semi-starvation.  Germany  and  Eastern  Prussia 
were  in  a  similar  condition,  while  in  Russia  both  pestilence  and  fam- 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  185 

ine  raged  terribly.  In  Finland,  in  Algeirs,  in  Tunis,  and  in  other 
localities  in  Europe  and  Asia,  it  was  no  better.  "Fully  100,000 
Arabs  have  fallen  victims  within  the  last  six  months,"  wrote  the 
Archbishop  of  Algiers.  Persia  has  been  nearly  annihilated  of  late 
by  famine  and  pestilence.  Of  the  year  1871,  the  Chicago  Tribune, 
November  15th,  1871,  says: 

"War,  famine,  pestilence,  fire,  wind  and  water,  and  ice,  have  been  let  loose 
and  have  done  their  worst,  and  with  such  appalling  results,  and  with  such 
remarkable  phenomena  accompanying  them,  that  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  atr 
men  have  sometimes  thought  the  end  of  the  world  had  come. 

Want  of  space  forbids  our  itemizing  at  any  length  in  regard  to 
the  calamities  predicted;  suffice  it  to  say,  that  in  nearly  all  parts  of 
the  world  "famine  and  plague  have  sorely  afflicted  the  sons  of  men, 
and  sent  many  millions  to  an  untimely  grave." 

The  latter  part  of  the  prophecy  states  that  the  "chastening  hand 
of  an  Almighty  God,"  through  the  judgments  mentioned  in  the 
prophecy,  will  be  upon  the  nations  until  God  "hath  made  a  full  end 
of  all  nations;  that  the  cry  of  the  Saints,  and  of  the  BLOOD  of  the 
Saints,  shall  cease  to  come  up  into  the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth 
to  be  avenged  of  their  enemies."  "The  cry  of  the  Saints,"  and  the 
'•blood  of  the  Saints"  here  mentioned,  pointed  to  their  coming  per- 
secutions, barbarously  cruel,  fiendish,  and  bloody,  as  they  proved  to 
be.  The  first  very  serious  persecution  of  the  Saints  began  at  In- 
dependence, Missouri,  July  20th,  1833.  An  armed  mob  was  organ- 
ized under  the  leadership  of  George  Simpson,  and  was  either  coun- 
tenanced or  abetted  by  many  ministers  of  religion  and  government 
officials. 

The  printing  press  of  the  Church  was  principally  destroyed,  in- 
cluding book-work,  furniture,  apparatus,  and  type,  also  the  printing 
office,  with  the  dwelling  house  of  the  editor.  The  Evening  and 
Morning  Star,  and  the  Upper  Missouri  Advertizer,  the  one  a  month- 
ly and  the  other  a  weekly  paper,  were  forcibly  stopped,  and  their 
further  publication  forbidden. 

A  number  were  whipped,  tarred  and  feathered,  among  them  Ed- 
ward Partridge  and Allen,  late  of  Council  Bluffs.  Some  re- 
ceived a  pelting  with  rocks  and  a  beating  with  guns  and  sticks 
Ten  houses  were  partly  demolished,  and  standing  grain  in  some  places 
destroyed;  but,  worst  of  all,  one,  a  Bro.  Barber,  was  killed,  and  some 
others  seriously  wounded. 

The  grounds  upon  which  this  persecution  began,  were,  to  use  the 


186  The  Divine  Calling  of 

language  of  those  connected  with  it,  as  seen  in  the  published  pro- 
eeedingsj  printed  in  The  Western  Monitor,  August  2d,  1833,  for  the 
mobbers  "to  rid  themselves  of  the  sect  of  fanatics,  called  Mormons*" 
"this  singular  sect  of  pretended  Christians;"  "they  now  number 
1200  souls  in  this  [Jackson]  county."  "Elevated,  as  they  mostly 
are,  but  little  above  the  condition  of  our  blacks,  either  in  regard  to 
property  or  education,  they  have  become  a  subject  of  much  anxiety 
on  that  part,  serious  and  well  grounded  complaints  having  been  al- 
ready made  of  their  corrupting  influence  on  our  slaves."  "We 
are  daily  told,  and  not  by  the  ignorant  alone,  but  by  all  classes  of 
them,  that  we  (the  Gentiles)  of  this  county,  are  to  be  cut  off,  and 
our  lands  appropriated  by  them  for  inheritances.  Whether  this  is 
to  be  accomplished  by  the  hand  of  the  destroying  angel,  the  judg- 
ments of  God,  or  the  arm  of  power,  they  are  not  fully  agreed  among 
themselves."  "They  openly  blaspheme  the  most  high  God,  and  cast 
contempt  on  his  holy  religion,  by  pretending  to  receive  revelations 
direct  from  heaven ;  by  pretending  to  speak  unknown  tongues  by  di- 
rect inspiration ;  and  by  divers  pretences  derogatory  to  God  and  re- 
ligion, and  to  the  utter  subversion  of  human  reason."  "What  would 
be  the  fate  of  our  lives  and  property  in  the  hands  of  jurors  and  wit- 
nesses, who  do  not  blush  to  declare,  and  would  not  upon  any  occa- 
sion hesitate  to  swear,  that  they  have  wrought  miracles,  and  have 
been  the  subjects  of  miraculous  and  supernatural  cures,  and  have 
conversed  with  God  and  his  angels,  and  possess  and  exercise  the  gifts 
of  divination,  and  of  unknown  tongues,  and  fired  with  the  prospect 
of  obtaining  inheritances  without  money  and  without  price — may  be 
better  imagined  than  described."  "One  of  the  means  resorted  to 
by  them  in  order  to  drive  us  to  emigrate,  is  an  indirect  invitation  to 
the  free  brethren  of  color  in  Illinois,  to  come  up  like  the  rest,  to  the 
land  of  Zion.  True,  they  said  this  was  not  intended  to  invite,  but 
to  prevent  their  emigration;  but  this  weak  attempt  to  quiet  our  ap- 
prehension, is  but  a  poor  compliment  to  our  understandings." 

Here,  dear  reader,  are  the  main  charges  upon  which  over  1200 
•souls  were,  with  violence,  sorely  persecuted  and  driven  out  of  Jack- 
son county,  Missouri,  the  persecutors  themselves  being  the  witnesses. 

From  July  20th,  when  the  violent  persecutions  began,  till  Novem- 
ber of  the  same  year,  the  Saints  had  but  little  rest  from  their 
enemies,  though  they  sought  patiently  for  that  protection  which  was 
assured  by  the  laws  of  Missouri,  and  of  our  nation,  but  they  sought 
ii  vain. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  187 

While  the  Saints  were  fleeing  from  their  merciless  persecutors  in- 
to Clay  and  adjoining  counties,  the  Lord  displayed  his  glory  in  the 
heaven?,  to  the  comfort  and  delight  of  his  smitten  and  afflicted  peo- 
ple. The  heavens,  on  the  night  of  the  12th  of  November,  were  made 
grandly  beautiful  by  the  "falling  stars," — a  sign  to  the  Saints  that 
the  coming  of  Christ  is  near  : 

uln  Zion  [Missouri]  all  heaven  seemed  enwrapped  in  splendid  fire-works,  as 
if  every  star  in  the  broad  expanse  had  been  suddenly  hurled  from  its  course, 
and  sent  lawless  through  the  wilds  of  ether.  *  *  *  Beautiful  and  terrific  as 
was  the  scenery,  which  might  be  compared  to  the  falling  figs,  or  fruit,  when  the 
tree  is  shaken  by  a  mighty  wind,  yet  it  will  not  fully  compare  with  the  time 
when  the  sun  shall  become  black  like  sackcloth  of  hair,  the  moon  like  blood, 
and  the  stars  fall  to  the  earth." — Joseph,  Smith. 

Most  of  those  driven  from  Jackson  county  went  to  Clay  county, 
where  they  were  received  with  some  degree  of  kindness.  The  Saints 
continued  to  gather  into  Missouri,  chiefly  into  Clay,  Ray,  Davies, 
and  Caldwell  counties,  until  1837,  when  persecution  again  stretched 
forth  her  merciless  and  bloody  hand  against  them,  and  they  were 
mobbed,  robbed,  and  finally,  in  the  late  fall  of  1838,  driven  out  of 
the  State  into  Illinois,  under  the  exterminating  orders  of  Gov.  Lil- 
burn  W.  Boggs.  The  Church  in  Missouri  numbered  at  this  time 
12,000  or  more.  In  this  persecution,  well  nigh  every  barbarity  was 
practiced  that  brutal  lust  or  fiendish  cruelty  could  suggest.  Prop- 
erty was  stolen  and  burned ;  persons  beaten  and  maimed ;  others 
wounded  nigh  unto  death,  and  many  killed.  An  infirm  old  revolu- 
tionary soldier,  when  pleading  for  mercy,  and  telling  of  his  services 
as  a  soldier  in  procuring  our  dearly-bought  liberties,  was  hacked  to 
death  with  a  corn  cutter;  a  little  innocent  lad,  who,  when  hunted 
like  a  beast,  had  taken  refuge  in  a  blacksmith  shop  at  Haun's  Mills, 
was  shot  to  death  through  the  head,  in  cool  blood;  women  were  rav- 
ished, and  an  amount  of  exposure  and  suffering  forced  upon  many 
that  resulted  in  death,  or  in  permanently  impairing  their  health  and 
usefulness. 

Surely  "the  cry  of  the  Saints,  and  of  the  blood  of  the  Saints,"  did 
now,  from  seven  months  to  five  years  after  the  prophecy  was  uttered, 
ascend  up  into  the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth. 

Professor  Turner,  sometime  of  Illinois  College,  an  open  and  bitter 
opponent  of  the  Church  of  the  Latter  Day  Saints,  in  writing  of  the 
conduct  of  Missouri  towards  the  Mormons,  says : 

"Who  began  the  quarrel?  "Was  it  the  Mormons?  Is  it  not  notorious,  on  the 
contrary,  that  they  were  hunted  like  wild  beasts,  from  county  ]to  county,  before 


188  The  Divine  Calling  of 

they  made  any  desperate  resistance  ?  Did  they  ever,  as  a  body,  refuse  obedi- 
ence to  the  laws,  when  called  upon  to  do  so,  until  driven  to  desparation  by  re- 
peated threats  and  assaults  from  the  mob  ?  Did  the  State  ever  make  one  decent 
effort  to  defend  them  as  fellow  citizens  in  their  rights,  or  to  redress  their  wrongs  ? 
Let  the  conduct  of  its  govenors,  attorneys,  and  the  fate  of  their  final  petitions 
answer.  Have  any  who  plundered  and  openly  massacred  the  Mormons  ever 
been  brought  to  the  punishment  due  to  their  crimes?  Let  the  boasting  mur- 
derers of  begging  and  helpless  in&ncy  answer.  Has  the  state  ever  remunerated, 
even  those  known  to  be  innocent,  for  the  loss  of  either  their  properly  or  their 
arms?  Did  either  the  pulpit  or  the  press  throughout  the  State  raise  a  note  of 
remonstrance  or  alarm?  Let  the  clergymen  who  abetted,  and  the  editors  who 
encouraged  the  mob  answer." 

Thus  speaks  one  of  our  bitterest,  yet  comparatively  honorable  op- 
ponents. 

Nor  did  persecution  stop  even  here.  Its  fires  were  again  kindled 
in  Illinois,  in  Hancock  county  and  vicinity  in  1844  to  1846,  result- 
ing in  terrible  suffering  and  great  loss  of  life. 

The  persecutions  of  1838,  in  Missouri,  were  clearly  set  forth  in  a 
prophecy  given  through  Joseph  Smith,  at  Kirtland,  Ohio,  July  23d, 
1837,  one  year  and  more  before  the  persecution  occurred.  See 
Doctrine  and  Covenants  105  :  9.  It  reads: 

l'Yerily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  darkness  covereth  the  earth,  and  gross  dark- 
ness the  minds  of  the  people,  and  all  flesh  has  become  corrupt  before  my  face. 
Behold,  vengeance  cometh  speedily  upon  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth — a  day  of 
wrath,  a  day  of  burning,  a  day  of  desolation,  of  weeping,  of  mourning,  of  lamen- 
tation— and  as  a  whirlwind  it  shall  come  upon  all  the  face  of  the  earth,  saith  the 
Lord.  And  upon  my  house  [the  church]  shall  it  begin,  and  from  my  house 
shall  it  go  forth,  saith  the  Lord." 

The  "wrath,"  the  '-burning/'  the  "desolation,"  the  "weeping/'*  the 
"mourning/'  and  the  "lamentation''  here  predicted,  which  are  to  go 
forth  among  all  nations,  did  come  upon  the  Church  suddenly,  "as  a 
whirlwind,"  with  all  its  fearful  and  terrible  destructiveness.  No  one, 
unless  inspired  of  God,  could  have  foretold,  with  such  precision  and 
clearness,  the  bitter  persecutions  suffered  by  the  Saints  in  Missouri. 

The  persecutions  and  the  scattering  of  the  Saints  from  Nauvoo, 
were  foretold  by  Joseph.  His  death,  likewise,  he  himself  foretold. 
On  parting  with  his  wife,  at  Nauvoo,  when  he  went  to  Carthage  jail, 
under  promise  of  protection  from  Governor  Thomas  Ford,  he  told 
her  he  would  never  see  his  family  again, — that  his  work  was  done, 
— that  he  was  going  to  rest, — that  the  Church  would  be  broken  up 
and  scattered,  and  instructed  her  to  remain  with  the  family  at  Nau- 
voo, or  take  them  to  Kirtland,  Ohio.  More  than  once,  just  prior  to 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  189 

his  death,  he  predicted  that  if  Brigham  Young  should  get  the  lead 
of  the  Church  he  would  lead  it  to  hell. 

It  would  be  the  height  of  folly  to  say  that  these  prophecies  of 
Joseph,  so  numerous,  so  definite,  and  so  unlikely  to  be  fulfilled,  were 
mere  conjectures  or  guesses,  like  many  made  by  human  wisdom 
alone.  That  military  genius,  Napoleon,  tried  his  skill  in  making 
predictions.  He  said,  "In  fifty  years  all  Europe  will  be  either  Cos- 
sack or  Republican."  More  than  the  "fifty  years"  have  passed  away, 
and  the  prediction  is  found  false. 

Vettius  Yallens,  a  wise  man  of  Rome,  and  a  Pagan  oracle,  predict- 
ed that,  "If  it  be  true  as  historians  say,  that  Romulus  saw  twelve 
vultures  at  the  founding  of  Rome,  that  signifies  that  it  should  ex- 
ist for  twelve  centuries."  But  Rome,  under  its  eight  different 
forms  of  government,  has  existed  for  more  than  twenty-six  centuries. 

Shameful  failure  is  the  fate  of  human  predictions,  however  wise 
their  authors. 

Joseph  was  assassinated  in  Carthage  jail,  Hancock  county,  Illinois, 
June  27th,  1844,  at  the  age  of  thirty-eight  years  and  six  months, 
after  a  most  eventful  life,  seventeen  years  of  which  were  marked 
with  great  activities,  great  perplexities  and  numerous  persecutions. 
Those  who  knew  him  best  loved  him  most.  He  was  misunderstood 
and  misapprehended  by  the  masses;  blindly  opposed  by  the  pulpit 
and  the  press,  in  many  instances;  maligned  and  slandered  by  his 
enemies,  and  his  sentiments  perverted,  misconstrued  and  misstated 
by  those  who  should  have  been  his  truest  friends. 

His  work  was  great  in  the  foundations  which  he  laid,  rather  than 
in  the  immediate  results  which  he  wrought  out.  The  great  truths 
of  God,  and  the  exalted  principles  of  life  and  salvation  given  to  the 
race  through  him,  will  live,  and  be  earnestly  cherished  by  the  faith- 
ful and  true,  when  the  hoary  errors,  and  the  gilded  and  flimsy  the- 
ories of  uninspired  men,  will  be  remembered  only  with  sorrow,  and 
mentioned  only  with  pity  and  contempt. 

Joseph  uttered  many  predictions  concerning  the  spiritual  manifes- 
tations with  which  the  world  is  now  being  deluged  and  deceived. 
This  he  did  long  before  Spiritualism  was  introduced.  In  May,  1831, 
while  he  was  young  in  years,  and  limited  in  worldly  wisdom,  the 
Lord  said  through  him  to  the  Elders  of  the  Church : 

"Behold,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  that  'there  are  many  spirits  which  are  false 
spirits,  which  have  gone  forth  in  the  earth,  deceiving  the  world ;  and  also  Satan 
hath  sought  to  deceive  you,  that  ho  might  overthrow  you." — D.  &  C.  50 : 1.  |  j 


190  The  Divine  Calling  of 

In  June,  1831,  the  following  was  revealed  to  the  Elders  through 
him: 

"And  again  I  will  give  you  a  pattern  in  all  things,  that  ye  may  not  be  deceived ; 
for  Satan  is  abroad  in  the  land,  and  he  goeth  forth  deceiving  the  nations;  where- 
fore he  that  prayeth,  whose  spirit  is  contrite,  the  same  is  acccepted  of  me,  if  he 
obey  mine  ordinances.  He  that  speaketh,  whose  spirit  is  contrite,  whose  lan- 
guage is  meek,  and  edifieth,  the  same  is  of  God,  if  he  obey  mine  ordinances. 
And  again,  he  that  trembleth  under  my  power  shall  be  made  strong,  and  shall 
bring  forth  fruits  of  praise,  and  wisdom,  according  to  \i.  e.,  in  harmony  with] 
the  revelations  and  truths  I  have  given  you.  And  again,  he  that  is  overcome 
and  bringeth  not  forth  fruits,  even  according  to  this  pattern,  is  not  of  me ;  where- 
fore by  this  pattern  ye  shall  know  the  spirits  in  all  cases  under  the  whole  heav- 
ens. And  the  days  have  come,  according  to  men's  faith  it  shall  be  done  unto- 
them."— D.  &  C.  52:4,  5. 

A  short  time  before  this  revelation  was  given  a  number  of  per- 
sons in  the  Church  at  Kirtland  had  been  deceived  and  strangely 
handled  by  false  spirits.  Some  were  so  far  possessed  by  them  as  to 
lose  all  control  of  either  mind  or  body.  The  physical  manifestations 
were  startling  and  peculiar;  while  those  of  a  mental  or  spiritual 
character  were  such  as  to  bewilder  and  mislead  the  unwary  and  un- 
skillful. Joseph  and  Hyrum  readily  detected  the  arch  enemy  and 
proclaimed  against  him.  Of  this  Joseph  wrote  in  his  Church  His- 
tory : 

"On  the  6th  of  June,  the  Elders  from  the  various  parts  of  the  country  where 
they  were  laboring  camo  in,  and  the  Conference,  before  appointed,  convened  in 
Kirtland,  and  the  Lord  displayed  his  power  in  a  manner  that  could  not  be  mis- 
taken. The  man  of  sin  was  revealed,  and  the  authority  of  the  Melchisedec 
priesthood  was  manifested,  and  conferred  for  the  first  time  upon  several  of  the 
Elders.  It  was  clearly  evident  that  the  Lord  gave  us  power  in  proportion  to 
the  work  to  be  done,  and  strength  according  to  the  race  set  before  us,  and  grace 
and  help  as  our  needs  required." — Times  and  Seasons,  vol.  5,  page  416. 

The  origin,  character,  operations,  and  final  state  of  these  spirits, 
had  been  revealed  to  Joseph  before  this.  In  September,  1830,  the 
Lord  said  of  them : 

"Behold,  the  devil  was  before  Adam,  for  he  rebelled  against  me,  saying,  Give 
me  thine  honor,  which  is  my  power;  and  also  a  third  part  of  the  hosts  of  heav- 
en turned  he  away  from  me  because  of  their  agency;  and  they  were  thrust 
down,  and  thus  became  the  devil  and  his  angels ;  and  behold,  there  is  a  place 
prepared  for  them  from  the  beginning,  which  place  is  hell ;  and  it  must  needs  be 
that  the  devil  should  tempt  the  children  of  men,  or  they  could  not  be  agents 
unto  themselves,  for  if  they  never  should  have  bitter,  they  could  not  know  the 
sweet."— D.  &  0.  28:10. 

Of  spirit  manifestations  Joseph  wrote  in  A.  D.  1839: 

"We  are  to  try  the  spirits  and  prove  them,  for  it  is  often  the  case  that  men 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  191 

make  a  mistake  in  regard  to  these  things.  God  has  so  ordained  that  when  he 
has  communicated  no  vision  is  to  be  taken  but  what  you  see  by  the  seeing  of 
the  eye,  or  what  you  hear  by  the  hearing  of  the  ear.  When  you  see  a  vision, 
pray  for  the  interpretation;  if  you  get  not  this,  shut  it  up;  there  must  be  cer- 
tainty in  this  matter.  An  open  vision  will  manifest  that  which  is  more  impor- 
tant. Lying  spirits  are  going  forth  in  the  earth.  There  will  be  great  manifes- 
tations of  spirits,  both  false  and  true.  Being  born  again,  comes  by  the  Spirit  of 
G-od  through  ordinances.  An  angel  of  God  never  has  wings.  Some  will  say 
that  they  have  seen  a  spirit;  that  he  offered  them  his  hand,  but  they  did  not 
touch  it.  This  is  a  lie.  First,  it  is  contrary  to  the  plan  of  God;  a  spirit  cannot 
come  but  in  glory;  [as  Moses  and  Elias,  Matt.];  an  angel  has  flesh  and  bones; 
we  see  not  their  glory.  The  devil  may  appear  as  an  angel  of  light.  Ask  God 
to  reveal  it;  if  it  be  of  the  devil  he  will  flee  from  you;  if  of  God,  he  will  mani- 
fest himself,  or  make  it  manifest.  "We  may  come  to  Jesus  and  ask  him ;  he  will 
know  all  about  it;  if  he  comes  to  a  little  child  he  will  adapt  himself  to  the  lan- 
guage and  capacity  of  a  little  child.  Every  spirit,  or  vision,  or  singing,  is  not  of 
God.  The  devil  is  an  orator;  he  is  powerful;  he  took  our  Savior  on  to  a  pinacle 
of  the  temple,  and  kept  him  in  the  wilderness  for  forty  days.  The  gift  of  discern- 
ing of  spirits  will  be  given  to  the  Presiding  Elder.  Pray  for  him  that  he  may 
have  this  gift.  Speak  not  in  the  gift  of  tongues  without  understanding  it,  or 
without  interpretation.  The  devil  can  speak  in  tongues;  the  adversary  will 
come  with  his  work;  he  can  tempt  all  classes;  can  speak  in  English  or  Dutch. 
Let  no  one  speak  in  tongues  unless  he  interpret,  except  by  the  consent  of  the 
one  who  is  placed  to  preside;  then  he  may  discern  or  interpret,  or  another  may." 
—Milknnial  Star  17:312. 

By  the  foregoing  we  see  that  Joseph  was  thoroughly  informed  in 
regard  to  spirit  manifestations;  and  that  he  foreknew,  clearly,  the 
going  forth  of  lying  spirits  in  the  earth,  and  that  there  would  "be 
great  manifestations  of  spirit,  both  false  and  true." 

Nothing  short  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  by  revelation  and  prophecy, 
could  impart  such  facts  and  information,  and  so  plainly  make  known 
the  future.  Bancroft  Libi 

Having  examined  a  few  of  the  many  fulfilled  prophecies  of  Joseph 
Smith,  we  will  add  as  further  evidence  of  his  prophetic  character, 
that  he  organized  the  Church  of  Christ  after  the  Apostolic  pattern, 
given  in  1  Corinthians  12:28,  Ephesians  4 : 11;  and  restored  the 
primitive  doctrines  and  ordinances,  as  taught  and  practiced  by  the 
first  Christian  ministry,  in  all  their  divine  power  and  simplicity, 
(Heb.6:l-3;  Acts  2: 38;  8:18;  9:12;  19:6;  13:3;  1  Timothy 
4 : 14;  John  13  : 4,  5 ;  1  Cor.  11 :  23-31 ;  James  5  : 14,  15;  Mark 
10  : 13-16).  He  also  revived  and  renewed  the  same  general  prom- 
ises (John  7  : 16,  17;  Mark  16  : 15-18;  Acts  2  : 38,  39;  John  14 : 
26;  15:26;  16:7,13;  !Cor.l2ch.;  1  John  2: 27;  3:24;  Luke 
20  :35,  36;  John  5  : 28,  29;  1  Cor.  15  :  22,  23, 41-44;  Phil.  3: 20, 


192  The  Divine  Calling  of 

21;  John  17:20-24;  Rev.  20  : 4,  5,  6,  12,  13;  2  Pet.  3 : 13,  14; 
Matt.  5:5;  Rev.  5:10).  This  he  claimed  to  do  in  fulfillment  of 
Rev.  14:6,  7;  Mai.  4:5,  6;  Isaiah  11 : 11,  12;  18:3;  Luke  14 : 
16-24;  Matt.  20:6. 

He  brought  forth  by  inspiration  of  God  the  record  of  Joseph,  in 
fulfillment  of  Ezekiel  37:16,17,  18,  19,— the  "sealed  book"  of 
Isaiah  29:11,  12,  18,— the  "truth"  of  God,  hidden  in  the  earth, 
predicted  by  David,  Ps.  85:11,  as  we  have  demonstrated  in  the 
former  pages  of  this  work. 

His  was  the  usual  fate  of  God's  prophets — hated,  persecuted,  and 
destroyed  by  his  enemies  (Matt.  23  :  34;  Acts  7  :  52);  yet  tenderly 
and  passionately  beloved  by  all  those  who  knew  him  and  who  be- 
lieved him  to  be  a  servant  of  God.  "When  the  murky  clouds  of 
prejudice,  and  the  blinding  mists  of  falsehood  and  superstition  shall 
have  passed  away,  the  character  and  work  of  Joseph  Smith  will  ap- 
pear in  honor,  and  millions  will  revere  him  as  a  martyr. 

Joseph  Smith,  in  his  religious  effort  did  not  introduce  "another 
gospel,"  nor  "preach  another  Christ;"  but  he  simply  preached  "him 
of  whom  Moses  in  the  law  and  the  prophets  did  write,  Jesus  of 
Nazareth;"  and,  under  God,  he  restored  the  very  gospel  taught  by 
the  Saints  of  the  first  century  after  Christ,  in  fulfillment  of  Rev.  14  : 
6,  7.  He  organized  the  church  after  the  primitive  pattern,  and  set 
in  order  the  ordinances,  rites,  and  ceremonies,  as  they  were  in  the 
apostolic  age.  He  proclaimed  the  same  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as 
were  promised  by  Joel,  2  :  28, 29;  by  the  Lord  Jesus,  Mark  16  : 17, 
18;  John  14: 26;  15:26;  16  : 7,  8,  9,  10,  11;  by  Peter,  Acts  2  : 
38,  39,  and  Paul,  1  Cor.  12  : 1-31;  14  : 1-40,  etc.  He  prophesied 
of  men  within  and  without  the  Church ;  of  events  that  pertained  to 
the  Church  in  blessing  and  in  cursing;  of  events  to  transpire  in  our 
own  nation  and  among  the  nations  of  the  earth — of  wars,  famines, 
pestilences,  plagues,  earthquakes,  tempests,  destructions  and  desola- 
tions; of  the  waves  of  the  sea  heaving  themselves  beyond  their 
bounds;  of  the  rapid  increase  of  pride,  of  spiritual  iniquity,  and  of 
all  kinds  of  crime  and  wrong  doing.  He  prophesied  of  "great 
changes  in  the  times  and  in  the  seasons;"  and  of  the  great  incoming 
of  satanic  power,  and  the  rapid  spread  and  general  prevalence  of 
demon-spirit  power  among  the  nations.  He  prophecied  of  the  "temp- 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  193 

tations  and  great  tribulation"  and  apostasy  of  the  Twelve ;  and  of  B. 
Young,  that  ''if  he  got  the  lead  of  the  Church  he  would  lead  it  to 
hell."  He  prophecied  of  the  rebellion  of  the  Southern  States;  of 
their  calling  on  other  nations  for  aid  in  defense ;  of  the  slaves  being 
"marshaled  and  disciplined  for  war;"  and  of  the  Indians  becoming 
exceeding  angry,  of  their  marshaling  themselves  and  vexing  the  Gen- 
tiles with  a  sore  vexation;  and  of  the  wars  terminating  "in  the  death 
and  misery  of  many  souls."  He  also  prophesied  of  his  own  death, 
of  the  manner  of  it,  and  about  the  time  it  would  occur,  with  many 
other  things  we  have  not  time  nor  space  to  mention. 

He  translated,  between  September  22,  1827,  and  July,  1829,  a 
period  of  nearly  two  years,  the  Book  of  Mormon,  which  abounds  in 
historical  statements  relative  to  the  two  great  and  enlightened  na- 
tions which  once  possessed  North,  and  South,  and  Central  America, 
and  which  speaks  of  their  civilization  and  industries,  and  of  the  lo- 
cality of  the  great  centers  of  their  skilled  and  cultivated  populations; 
and  these  things,  highly  improbable  when  the  young  seer  gave  the 
Book  of  Mormon  to  the  world,  are  now,  for  the  last  fifty  years,  being 
confirmed  by  scientific  travelers,  explorers,  and  antiquarians. 

This  same  book  abounds  with  prophecies  touching  Jew  and  Gen- 
tile, churches  and  nations,  priests  and  people; — of  Eoman  Catholic, 
Protestant,  and  Latter  Day  Saints — of  their  corruptions,  their  evils 
and  their  fate.  It  speaks  of  the  rapid  and  favorable  changes  that 
would  take  place  in  the  physical  condition  of  the  land  of  Judea 
soon  after  the  coming  forth  of  the  Book  of  Mormon — that  the  land 
which  was  given  by  the  oath  of  God  to  Abraham  and  to  his  seed 
forever,  should  be  turned  into  "a  fruitful  field."  It  speaks  of  the 
rapid  downfall  of  "the  mother  of  harlots"  soon  after  the  coming 
forth  of  "the  book,"  an  event  which  has  been  transpiring  since  1848, 
and  in  a  striking  manner  since  August  18th,  1870.  It  speaks  also 
of  the  work  of  the  Lord  beginning  at  that  time  for  the  restoration 
of  the  literal  seed  of  Israel  to  their  own  lands  of  promise,  and  of  the 
favor  arid  honor  which  the  seed  of  Israel  should  receive  at  the  hands 
of  the  Gentiles.  It  speaks  of  the  fact  that  the  ancient  civilizations 
of  America  were  built  up  by  two  separate  and  distinct  peoples,  one 
succeeding  the  other  in  dominion — a  matter  largely  agitated  by  an- 
tiquarians and  travelers  of  late,  and  now  generally  admitted — nations 
differing  widely  in  their  language  and  their  architecture.  It  tells 


194  The  Divine  Calling  of 

of  the  marvelous  wealth  of  the  land  in  gold  and  silver  and  all  man- 
ner of  mineral  products,  a  matter  of  which  little  comparatively  was 
known  till  long  since  the  coming  forth  of  the  book.  Its  moral  teach- 
ings and  influence  are  unsurpassed  in  purity,  while  its  doctrines, 
plainly  expressed,  and  embraced  in  simple  forms  of  speech,  are  the 
doctrines  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Besides  translating  the  Book  of  Mormon,  Mr.  Smith  revised,  cor- 
rected, and  translated  the  Old  and  New  Testaments — or  portions  of 
them — restoring  much  that  had  been  lost  from  the  text,  and  remov- 
ing from  the  text  many  things  of  a  hurtful  tendency  which  had  been 
added  by  uninspired  men.  In  this  translation,  in  the  first  eleven 
chapters,  is  furnished  the  easy  answer  to  the  question  now  agitating 
the  enlightened  world,  as  to  why,  among  all  the  leading  ancient  na- 
tions, among  them  the  ancient  Mexicans  and  Peruvians,  and  many 
of  the  Pagan  nations  of  to-day,  we  find  nearly  all  the  leading  relig- 
ious ideas  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  though  in  a  mutilated 
and  corrupted  form.  It  informs  us  that  the  creation,  the  fall  of 
man,  the  scheme  of  redemption  in  all  its  details,  the  punishment  of 
the  wicked,  the  rewards  of  the  righteous,  and  the  glory  of  the  re- 
deemed, were  all  revealed  and  taught  to  man  from  Adam  down  to 
Noah,  and  from  Noah  to  his  posterity,  thus  reaching  down  to  the 
tower  of  Babel  and  the  confusion  of  languages.  We  can  readily  see, 
on  reflection,  how  natural,  how  easy  and  certain  it  was  that  these 
wonderful  and  important  ideas  should  flow  out  with  all  the  streams 
of  immigration  from  the  Tower,  to  all  parts  of  the  world,  and  be  per- 
petuated under  variously  corrupted  forms  as  they  have  existed  in 
the  past,  and  as  they  exist  to-day.  And  with  this  view  of  the  mat- 
ter, as  furnished  us  by  the  Inspired  Translation,  (as  also  by  the 
Book  of  Mormon  and  the  revelations  of  Joseph),  we  can  see  why  it 
is  that  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  was,  and  is,  and  is  to  be,  "the  Desire  of 
all  nations"  (Hag.  2  :  7).  Every  movement  of  the  wheels  of  time — 
every  important  change  among  the  nations  or  among  religionists, 
every  discovery  in  the  heavens  above  or  in  the  earth  beneath,  every 
hidden  thing  uncovered  and  every  secret  thing  revealed,  the  revela- 
tions and  miracle-wonders  of  "the  spirits  of  devils,"  the  revelations 
and  testimony  of  God's  Spirit  to  man,  all  bear  witness,  directly  or 
remotely,  to  the  important  and  cheering  fact  that  God  has  spoken 
from  the  heavens  in  these  latter  days,  and  caused  his  "truth  to 
suring  out  of  the  earth  •"  and  that  he  called  and  inspired  the  youth, 


Joseph  Smith  Defended. 


195 


Joseph  Smith,  as  his  prophet,  seer,  revelator,  and  translator,  whom 
he  honored  in  the  founding  and  building  up  of  his  church  and  king- 
dom, preparatory  to  the  glorious  appearing  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  the  ushering  ir?  of  the  age  of  millennial  glory.  And  to  these 
facts  tens  of  thousands  of  honest,  rejoicing  hearts  can  hear  truthful 
testimony.  Joseph  Smith  was  a  prophet  of  God,  and  every  effort 
to  disprove  that  fact  only  makes  it  the  more  apparent  that  he  was. 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  197 


INDEX. 


Adam — Michael,  an  Angel 88 

American  Antiquities 143,  153,  158 

Apocrypha 83 

Apostasy  of  Latter  Day  Saints 171,  173 

Baptism 47,48,  50,  51,  80,  81,  133,  144 

"        For  the  Dead 145 

11        Object  of 51,81 

11        Of  Ancient  Date 48 

"        Mode  of 50 

Bible  and  Book  of  Mormon  Compared 36,  128 

Bible  Defects  in  History 7,  27,  33,  86,  135 

"     Miracles  vs.  Those  Now 141 

"     More  Truth  Than  it  Alone 54 

Book  of  Lehi 77 

Book  of  Mormon,  Coming  forth  of 148,  150 

"  "  Historical  Errors  Possible 6 

u  "  Morals  and  Theology 171 

"  "  Not  Found  by  a  Gentile 173 

11  "  Prophecies  of 165,  16G 

Christ's  Appearing  Before  His  Birth  and  After  His  Resurrection  18 

"        Birth,  Place  of 12 

"  "      Time  of...  8,134 


198  The  Divine  Calling  of 

INDEX. 

Christ's  Crucifixion,  Time  of 7 

"        Genealogy 46 

"        Second  Coming 17 

Christian  Doctrine  Among  the  Heathen 49 

"        Name  of 22 

Christians  Not  All  Priests 57 

Church  Organization 173,  191 

Cities  Sunk  at  Time  of  Crucifixion 163 

Confusion  of  Languages 130 

Consciousness  after  Death 106 

Covenant  Breaking 87 

Criticism  on  Mormonism  Invited 5 

Destruction  of  Jaredites  and  Lamanites 129,  142 

Doctrine  of  Christ 191 

Egyptian  Art  in  Peru  and  Mexico 159 

"         Reformed 138 

Elias — Gabriel 98 

Endless  Punishment 146 

Errors  in  Book  of  Mormon  History  Possible 6 

"      in  Bible 7,  27,  33,86,  135 

Feet  Washing 87 

Finder  of  Book  of  Mormon  not  a  Gentile 173 

Fossil  Remains 164 

Generation,  What  Constitutes 74 

Grammar,  Joseph's 38 

Inspiration,  Degrees  of 40 

Inspired  Translation 35,  41,  78,  84,  128,  134 

Interpreters 30,  32,  34,  84,  94,  141,  142 

Jaredites,  Destruction  of 129,  142 

"        Longevity  of 127 

Jaredite  Kings 127 

John  the  Baptist  Resurrected 63 

"        Evangelist  to  Tarry 88 

Joseph's  Land 162 

Joseph  and  Oliver's  Ordination 52,  64 

Joseph  as  a  Translator 6,  94 

Joseph's  Ministry  and  Writings 191,  195 


Joseph  Smith  Defended.  199 

INDEX. 

Joseph's  Prophecies  Fulfilled:  Brighamite  Apostasy 192 

"  "  "         Famines 184,185 

"  "  "         His  Own  Death 193 

"  "         Persecution  of  Saints 185-188 

"         Pestilences  and  Scourges  ..177,  178 

"         Slaves  Marshaled  for  War 183 

"  "          Spiritualism 189-191 

"  "  "          Wars,  Foreign 182 

"  "  u       Indian 183,184 

"  "  "         War,  Not  Peace 177 

"  u  u          War  of  Rebellion 180,181 

"  "  "         Waves  of  the  Sea 179 

Laban  Killed 131 

Lamanites,  Destruction  of 129,  142 

Land  of  Joseph 162 

Longevity,  Jaredite 127 

"          Nephite 144 

"Mormon,11  Word 82 

Mulek,  Son  ot>f"Zedekiah 138 

Nephi,  a  King 124 

"        Builds  a  Temple 124 

Nephites,  Destruction  of 129,  142 

Longevity 144 

Numbers  of 125,  126 

"          Perpetuated 132 

New  Jerusalem 74 

Oliver  to  Translate 137 

Ordination,  Joseph  and  Oliver 52,  64 

Organization  of  the  Church 173,  191, 

Papacy,  Fall  of,  Foretold 165 

People  of  Zarahemla 24 

Plagiarism,  Charge  of,  Refuted 20,  96 

Plates  of  Book  of  Mormon 23,  26,  28,  66,  71,  99,  137,  142,  152 

Polygamy  Not  Joseph's  Doctrine 175 

Pre-existence 41 

Priesthood,  Aaronic 16,  52,  53,  59,  63 

"          Melchisedek . .  13,  55,  59,  61,  136 


200  The  Divine  Calling  of 

INDEX. 

Printing  House 82 

Prophecies  of  Book  of  Mormon '. 165,  166 

Joseph 1*17-193 

"Relics11 1531-55 

.  Reformed  Egyptian 138 

Second  Coming  of  Christ 17 

"Seventy  Weeks11  of  Daniel 9 

Soul  of  Man 41,  93,  106 

Spiritual  Creation 41 

Gifts 192 

Stone,— Hiram  Page 135 

Testimony  of  Cowdery,  Whitmer,  and  Harris 70,  99,  135,  137 

Three  and  Eight  Witnesses 99 

Three  Glories 90,  147 

"       Nephites 23 

Tithes 15 

Translator,  Joseph  as  a 6,  94 

Responsible  Only  for  the  Faithfulness  of  his  Work  ...     6 

Truth,  All,  Harmonious 176 

Urim  and  Thummim 94 

Witnesses,  Three  and  Eight 99 

Zarahemlaites 25 

Zion  not  Removed 132 


Printed  at  Herald  Office,  Piano,  Kendall  County,  Illinois. 


PUBLICATIONS     ISSUED 

A  X  D     FOR     SALE 

He  Boafd  of  Pufelidation  of  tl^e  dl|tif(3b;  of 

AT  THEIR  PUBLISHING  HOI  81     [» 

LAMONI,  DECATUR  CO.,  IOWA. 


(WEEKLY) 

Price  $&.5O  per  year, 

Official  paper  of  tlie  Reorganized  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter  Day 
Saints,  explanatory  of  the  faith  of  the  Church,  and  contains  correspond- 
ence from  different  parts  of  the  world,  giving  accounts  of  the  progress 
of  Hie  Church,  and  setting  forth  the  dealings  of  God  with  his  people. 
Published  weekly,  sixteen  large  pages 

Zion's  Hope. 

A  paper  for  children  and  Sunday  Schools,  published;semi-monthly,  price 
60c.  per  year. 

JOSEPH  SMITH,  EDITOR 


INSPIRED  TRANSLATION  OF  THE  BIBLE, 

BY  JOSEPH  SMITH.  THE  MARTYR. 
Price  $1.50  and  ->  . 

B  (J  O  K     O  F     M  O  R  M  O  N  , 
THE    SAIXTS'    HARP — HYMN    BOOK, 

Prici  ,-1.50. 

DOCTRINE  AND  COVENANTS, 

Prio    -  si. 75. 

H  E  S  P  E  R  I  S, 

POIMHS  bv  David  H.  Smith,  #••>  pages,  fancy  cloth,  sill  t.-rl^cs.  pri<-<         ~" 

V  O  T  CE    OF    W  A  R  XI  X  G- , 

-.Mr.;  iu  cloth.  5()c. 
THPJ  AJ'.ovr.  I'liu  i:-  -  - 


